|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Sept 26, 2011 19:33:40 GMT -8
www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/130586748.htmlDepending on how things with realignment pan out... I would be ok with this as long as we get AQ status and a more lucrative Television contract. Would be FB only. Don't know the logistics... seems unfair to have to play 2 championship games to get to the BCS.... MWC Champion vs. C-USA Champion. We'll see how it plays out.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Sept 26, 2011 19:49:40 GMT -8
MW should get AQ on its own after this season. Period. Even if just provisionally.
|
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Sept 26, 2011 20:11:37 GMT -8
I would want the MWC to add 2 of the best available (TCU please!, BYU... loooooong shot, Houston, SMU, UTEP) teams (12 total), get AQ status (we likely will), have a MWC championship game (^ $$$) and renegotiate the TV contract (^ $$$$) solo before committing to any type of alliance with C-USA
|
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Sept 27, 2011 8:48:50 GMT -8
would not mind MW adding two of the schools from Texas and dropping the schools that do not take football seriously- so we have 8 teams and the USA also have 8- it makes being BCS eligible a lot easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Sept 27, 2011 9:08:01 GMT -8
would not mind MW adding two of the schools from Texas and dropping the schools that do not take football seriously- so we have 8 teams and the USA also have 8- it makes being BCS eligible a lot easier. Unfortunately we can't "drop" teams. If that were the case we would have been dropped long ago. The only way that happens is if we have an "airport" meeting to form another conference. |
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Sept 27, 2011 9:47:10 GMT -8
40% of the schools are new plus SDSU has a new president (50%)so that may be the opportunity to make the move to a new conference of 8 to 10 schools-(add some schools from Texas and drop those who consider football an after thought) let USA form the East. Get new TV deal
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecbb on Sept 27, 2011 9:51:21 GMT -8
Noooooooooooooooooooooo!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Fred Noonan on Sept 27, 2011 11:42:59 GMT -8
Although I'm not particularly enamored with the idea I can see how it would allow the Bowl Alliance folks to "kill two birds" with one stone. A playoff between the MWC and the MAC would eliminate an awful lot of the pressure on them without unduly upsetting their applecart. Once the bowls were captured and the money divided the next natural plum became the TV alliances. Now, the big bucks are really in the conference rights and allowing a playoff for the bowls will not impact that at all. From the MWC perspective I suppose the question really is how much is a BCS bowl really worth when divided so many ways and can a playoff game generate more revenue to justify it when divided between two conferences. What is the real bottom line in other words? I suppose that will never be revealed, but I'd sure like to know the answer. As I said, I'm not enamored of the idea but unless there is something in it for the BC$ folks I don't see them giving ground and AQ status to the MWC. This way at least they get something--two conferences off their back while not affecting their division of the marketplace. The Fred Noonan School of Navigation.  |
|
|
|
Post by Trujillos & Beer on Sept 27, 2011 12:42:11 GMT -8
No merger, just take their best teams. Every other conference is tyring to survive or get stronger yet Thompson wants to help out his friend.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2011 12:57:35 GMT -8
The three front range schools are all that's let of the Gang of Five. They are tied at the hip and therefore never going to be part of kicking each other out of the MW.
SDSU should not be privy to any "alliance" with CUSA. We should instead wait to make sure AFA isn't added to the Big 12. If AFA DOES leave the MW, unless TCU stays because the Big East falls apart, all four of the best football programs will have bailed. That will speak volumes about the MW's future just like such dregs as Tulane and Rice speak volumes about CUSA's. At that point SDSU, Boise, Fresno, Hawaii and the two Nevada schools need to talk about forming a new conference.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecfankrishnan on Sept 27, 2011 13:10:25 GMT -8
No merger, just take their best teams. Every other conference is tyring to survive or get stronger yet Thompson wants to help out his friend. MUST dump Wyoming and five others from this group of 22. Why Wyoming? They are a relatively small market, but they dominate it. In fact, a recent study showed they had more fans than SDSU. One winning season and every one seems to think we are USC. We have limited leverage and need to do what it takes to strengthen our shot at BCS...championship game with Conference USA makes sense. It's just not realistic to believe other top programs are going to ditch Conf USA (or any other legitmiate conference) for the MWC. However, splitting BCS money with 22 teams isn't going to be any great windfall. To make that championsip game really interesting the BCS money should only go to the winner's league! That would certainly draw some more interest to the game! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2011 14:51:45 GMT -8
Why Wyoming? They are a relatively small market, but they dominate it. In fact, a recent study showed they had more fans than SDSU. One winning season and every one seems to think we are USC. We have limited leverage and need to do what it takes to strengthen our shot at BCS...championship game with Conference USA makes sense. It's just not realistic to believe other top programs are going to ditch Conf USA (or any other legitmiate conference) for the MWC. Because Wyoming belongs in a league with Montana. It has the exact same attendance, TV market, etc. There's just absolutely no national appeal to that program, nor, just as important, is there even the potential for them to develop a national following. Wins and losses over the last 5-10 years are not at the top of the list when talking about this stuff. Wins over the last fifty years matter though only because it reflects tradition, history, etc. It's about a) how influential the alums b) how many people away from a school's home city would have any interest in watching them on TV. This is no knock on Wyoming's effort since I think they do very well with what they have. However, they have very little to work with. Wyoming started playing the equivalent of Division I-A football in 1902. Wyoming football peaked in 1967 when the Cowboys went to the Sugar Bowl. That was two seasons before SDSU moved up to Division I-A. 1968 was an election year so it took me about 10 seconds to find out the state population back then. It was 332K and change. Wyoming has added only about 150,000 people since. How many people has SD county added since 1968, 1.5 million? I have great respect for Wyoming but the fact is, they are at best Washington State and how many times has WSU finished in the top 24 in the last 20 years even with a full share of BCS money? We shouldn't kick WSU to the curb but if the MW continues to degrade in overall talent, there is no reason to continue to affiliate with schools like that which bring no money into conference coffers. Same for several CUSA schools mentioned above. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecfankrishnan on Sept 27, 2011 16:05:33 GMT -8
It's just not that simple. As this article points out: thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/ "The most appealing targets here might not be those schools like Memphis or Houston that play second or third fiddle in a major market, but instead those like the University of Central Florida, East Carolina or Southern Mississippi that have built up decent fan bases in rural and exurban areas." Wyoming - 307,935 Fans SDSU - 242,126 Sure we have more potential with a bigger market, but that's been the case for the last 100 years. It's just a little early and arrogant for SDSU fans to be talking about dropping other progrrams don't you think? It was just 3 years ago our local newspaper was promoting dropping the entire football program. |
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodAztec on Sept 27, 2011 17:56:27 GMT -8
From the MWC perspective I suppose the question really is how much is a BCS bowl really worth when divided so many ways and can a playoff game generate more revenue to justify it when divided between two conferences. What is the real bottom line in other words? I suppose that will never be revealed, but I'd sure like to know the answer. Precisely my thoughts on this matter. Like you, I'm curious to know how much more money will each school get with this proposed alliance when the BCS bowl, championship and new TV contract are calculated. |
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodAztec on Sept 27, 2011 18:15:02 GMT -8
Why Wyoming? They are a relatively small market, but they dominate it. In fact, a recent study showed they had more fans than SDSU. One winning season and every one seems to think we are USC. We have limited leverage and need to do what it takes to strengthen our shot at BCS...championship game with Conference USA makes sense. It's just not realistic to believe other top programs are going to ditch Conf USA (or any other legitmiate conference) for the MWC. However, splitting BCS money with 22 teams isn't going to be any great windfall. To make that championsip game really interesting the BCS money should only go to the winner's league! That would certainly draw some more interest to the game! How many times has a CUSA champion cracked the top 25 since TCU and others left this league? My reason for asking is, would an alliance championship game generate national interest if, for example, our champion is ranked in the top 10 whilst CUSA's champion is unranked? In this scenario, we'd lose our opportunity to play in a BCS bowl if our champion loses to an unranked CUSA team. On the other hand, I can see the advantage of an alliance with a guaranteed berth to a BCS bowl because if an SDSU champion ranked #20 plays an CUSA champion ranked #25, then no matter who wins still plays in a BCS bowl. In the current format, neither ranked team will play in a BCS bowl. Moreover, I like your concept of the winner's league getting all the BCS revenue or at the minimum 80% of it instead of the whole enchilada being shared equally to the entire alliance. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2011 18:25:46 GMT -8
It's just not that simple. As this article points out: thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/ "The most appealing targets here might not be those schools like Memphis or Houston that play second or third fiddle in a major market, but instead those like the University of Central Florida, East Carolina or Southern Mississippi that have built up decent fan bases in rural and exurban areas." Wyoming - 307,935 Fans SDSU - 242,126 Sure we have more potential with a bigger market, but that's been the case for the last 100 years. It's just a little early and arrogant for SDSU fans to be talking about dropping other progrrams don't you think? It was just 3 years ago our local newspaper was promoting dropping the entire football program. 1. The fan thing. Those figures are based on hits to internet sites by people ID'ing themselves as fans of various schools. There isn't much to do in Wyoming so the Cowboys have a rabid fan base. However, the 300+ isn't going to change even if they reach their max productivity. The SDSU figure, in contrast, could easily triple if the Aztecs reach their winning potential. 2. ECU. The biggest misconception in the world is that school also has potential. The Pirates have zero national appeal and are located on essentially a cul-de-sac like SDSU. The difference is the closest big city isn't just a couple hours away, it's almost 400 miles away. Although that city doesn't have two BCS universities like L.A. does, Raleigh has only a quarter of a million people, or about 1/20 the population of the city of L.A. and it's home to NC State. Bottom line is ECU is just a big brother version of Wyoming. 3. USM. Similar to ECU in that Hattiesburg is as small as Greenville. At least the closest big cities, Jackson and Mobile, AL, aren't home to a BCS school. To me, assuming the Big East falls apart so TCU stays in the MW and Houston wouldn't leave CUSA, this would be best for all concerned. Take all 10 members of the probable 2012 MW, add TCU to get to 11 and then add these five CUSA schools: UTEP, Houston, SMU, Memphis and Southern Miss. Let the rest of CUSA take back USF and then add Troy and Middle Tennessee to go to 10 and have their own east-centric non-AQ conference. With the Big 12 apparently expanding eastward, along with the Big Ten, the SEC and the ACC, the country east of the Mississippi will already have more than enough AQ conferences. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2011 19:13:39 GMT -8
|
|
