|
|
Post by texasaztec on Jun 13, 2010 11:36:23 GMT -8
This is the scenario that most concerns me in all the realignment talk. IF Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State all go to the Pac 10, then that leaves 5 teams left in the original Big 12 (Nebraska and Colorado are already gone). There is TREMENDOUS incentive for the remaining 5 from the Big 12 to stay together and add strong teams. With all the payouts from the leaving teams, and their current conference coffers the Big 12 will have about $70m. In addition, they have the BCS AQ already established. If the MWC doesn't put up a solid front, but allows itself to be raided (i.e. Utah's willingness to go to the Pac 10 is a sign of that), then the Big 12 could add 7 teams to their conference to become the Big 12 once again. If ALL those teams came from the Mountain West, do we really think SDSU would make the cut? What if only some of them came from the MWC, and others came from other conferences...that reduces SDSU's chances even further. This is the scenario that concerns me the most. If this occurs, the MWC either raids the WAC, or it ceases to exist and we go back to the WAC. Here is a link from Baylor's fan board on "Why the Big 12 will raid the MWC and not vice-versa" www.baylorfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=192656 |
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Jun 13, 2010 11:42:29 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2010 12:06:00 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC. No, we won't and I'm tired of explaining why this guy's theory, which is expounded only by the administrator of the TCU message board and some of his cronies, isn't going to happen. (I continue to think the most likely result is Mizzou, KU, KSU and ISU will go to the Big East.) |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jun 13, 2010 12:12:08 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC. Absolutely not. Not until you fix your football program. After that, maybe. Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by aztecpaulg on Jun 13, 2010 12:14:21 GMT -8
Somewhere on this board, it was mentioned that disolving the Big XII could be done by a majority vote. If that's true, the 7 teams leaving will vote to do away with the conference to avoid having to pay the fee for leaving. The AQ for th BCS is only through 2012. CU is already leaving after that year, so that might be a non issue too.
|
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 13, 2010 12:18:47 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC. No, we won't and I'm tired of explaining why this guy's theory, which is expounded only by the administrator of the TCU message board and some of his cronies, isn't going to happen. (I continue to think the most likely result is Mizzou, KU, KSU and ISU will go to the Big East.) you made be tired of it, but the ESPN reports thats the the 5 teams under any scenario said that they would like a BIG12 to remain. Its really all dependent on how many the Pac10 is able to pull away. if the Pac10 ends up with, oh just Utah or one other team...than i would say the MWC has a good chance of losing a member. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2010 12:41:49 GMT -8
No, we won't and I'm tired of explaining why this guy's theory, which is expounded only by the administrator of the TCU message board and some of his cronies, isn't going to happen. (I continue to think the most likely result is Mizzou, KU, KSU and ISU will go to the Big East.) you made be tired of it, but the ESPN reports thats the the 5 teams under any scenario said that they would like a BIG12 to remain. Its really all dependent on how many the Pac10 is able to pull away. if the Pac10 ends up with, oh just Utah or one other team...than i would say the MWC has a good chance of losing a member. Remember the domino principle? It hasn't been discussed much lately but it's happening with the Big 12. First, Nebraska left six days ago for the Big Ten. Then, Colorado left three days ago for the Pac-10. I'll predict that as early as tomorrow, aTm will be the third to leave, for the SEC. If the Orangebloods Rivals site is correct, the aTm board was already 6-3 in favor of going to the SEC and Doofus Dan Beebe's latest gambit has really pissed off posters to the aTm board. So although Mizzou, KU, KSU, ISU and Baylor like the idea of giving even a greater piece of the Big 12 pie to UT, the aTm folks just hate it. I think until yesterday night when Beebe struggled to put it together that the odds of aTm going to the SEC were only 50-50. However, I think this is going to show the three dissenters that however much they want aTm to retain its historical conference relationship with UT, this isn't their father's UT Once aTm leaves, Beebe will also have to face rumors that the SEC is talking with Mizzou and Kansas about becoming its 14th member. So if 48 hours from now there is anything left of the Big 12 besides a name and five "members" struggling to join the Big East, I'll be very surprised. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Jun 13, 2010 15:11:55 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC. Absolutely not. Not until you fix your football program. After that, maybe. Yoda out... Nice chop, YoYo. But it looks to me like the activity going on right now will relegate WAC football to not much more than a club sport. And that includes you Fresneckians. It's too bad. I have to admire Fresno for their success in recent years, but that just might be part of the thinking by the Puke-10. They hate you for your success just as much as they hated us for our success before. A few years ago Weber went on bended knee to the Puke-10 Presidents lobbying for consideration for inclusion in their conference. Many of us wrote letters in support. I did. To the best of my recollection, the least discouraging responses I got were from ASU and OSU. USC and UCLA were not interested, and neither was Stanford. I don't think any of the others bothered to respond. Anyway, if we go down you might not be too far behind. |
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 13, 2010 17:23:40 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by ourtime on Jun 13, 2010 17:31:22 GMT -8
This is the most likely scenario. Everybody gets what they desire. The fly in the ointment is if Texas A&M goes to the SEC, this merger will happen without either Utah or Kansas, one of those schools go to the Pac 16. In which case the conference sits at 14 schools instead of 16. |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jun 13, 2010 17:33:18 GMT -8
Absolutely not. Not until you fix your football program. After that, maybe. Yoda out... Nice chop, YoYo. But it looks to me like the activity going on right now will relegate WAC football to not much more than a club sport. And that includes you Fresneckians. It's too bad. I have to admire Fresno for their success in recent years, but that just might be part of the thinking by the Puke-10. They hate you for your success just as much as they hated us for our success before. A few years ago Weber went on bended knee to the Puke-10 Presidents lobbying for consideration for inclusion in their conference. Many of us wrote letters in support. I did. To the best of my recollection, the least discouraging responses I got were from ASU and OSU. USC and UCLA were not interested, and neither was Stanford. I don't think any of the others bothered to respond. Anyway, if we go down you might not be too far behind. First off, sorry for the chop. The poster deserved it but the rest of you didn't. As for our being behind you, I'm not sure that we won't lead you. Your conference has much greater prospects than ours does. Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by haleiwaaztec on Jun 13, 2010 17:36:32 GMT -8
I guess I still don't see the value of the MWC going to the watered down Big 12? The Big 12 doesn't have their own TV network, the remaining teams are not strong in Football and the power players in the MWC would not have the same power in the Big 12. They are in a much better place to pick and choose which Big 12 leftovers they want (i.e. who needs Iowa State). Bottom line is that a MWC with Kansas, Missouri, K-State, Baylor is a major power in Basketball and already has the Football teams with the addition of Boise State to get an auto BCS spot and take over the Big 12 as the #6 conference.
No way the MWC disolves...it will only get stronger.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 13, 2010 18:02:45 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC. Absolutely not. Not until you fix your football program. After that, maybe. Yoda out... Ya know, you might not piss people on here off so much if you judiciously used smileys here and there  . =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 13, 2010 18:44:46 GMT -8
I guess I still don't see the value of the MWC going to the watered down Big 12? The Big 12 doesn't have their own TV network, the remaining teams are not strong in Football and the power players in the MWC would not have the same power in the Big 12. They are in a much better place to pick and choose which Big 12 leftovers they want (i.e. who needs Iowa State). Bottom line is that a MWC with Kansas, Missouri, K-State, Baylor is a major power in Basketball and already has the Football teams with the addition of Boise State to get an auto BCS spot and take over the Big 12 as the #6 conference. No way the MWC disolves...it will only get stronger. What they have that we do not is the BCS status. From the article: “That has some merit because it would allow the remaining Big 12 schools to protect things like their NCAA Tournament basketball shares and the automatic qualifying bid to the BCS,” the source said. “ |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jun 13, 2010 19:05:12 GMT -8
I guess I still don't see the value of the MWC going to the watered down Big 12? The Big 12 doesn't have their own TV network, the remaining teams are not strong in Football and the power players in the MWC would not have the same power in the Big 12. They are in a much better place to pick and choose which Big 12 leftovers they want (i.e. who needs Iowa State). Bottom line is that a MWC with Kansas, Missouri, K-State, Baylor is a major power in Basketball and already has the Football teams with the addition of Boise State to get an auto BCS spot and take over the Big 12 as the #6 conference. No way the MWC disolves...it will only get stronger. What they have that we do not is the BCS status. From the article: “That has some merit because it would allow the remaining Big 12 schools to protect things like their NCAA Tournament basketball shares and the automatic qualifying bid to the BCS,” the source said. “ The BCS thing is the "biggie". If that in fact stays with whatever is left of the Big 12, then that is the way to go. It would be a very good football conference, but what a great BB conference! |
|
|
|
Post by La Mesa Aztec on Jun 13, 2010 19:19:58 GMT -8
What they have that we do not is the BCS status. From the article: “That has some merit because it would allow the remaining Big 12 schools to protect things like their NCAA Tournament basketball shares and the automatic qualifying bid to the BCS,” the source said. “ The BCS thing is the "biggie". If that in fact stays with whatever is left of the Big 12, then that is the way to go. It would be a very good football conference, but what a great BB conference! I agree. Big 16?, MWC, whatever it's called and whatever gets us the B(C)S status is what's best. If we can merge with the "leftovers" from the Big-12 that's the best that can happen for SDSU, which is what all of us should want And yes, what a great BB conference. |
|
|
|
Post by Village Aztec on Jun 13, 2010 20:21:54 GMT -8
BCS, Big Bowls and exit fees makes us join the old big 12.
Our TV market is larger then Nebraska. That saves us.
So who does the Sunbelt join? Just kidding.
All this may kill the BCS just as we are getting in.
Then we have all this greed for more money and a President who wants to spread the wealth. Now we can enter the Sunbelt in to discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Jun 13, 2010 20:27:14 GMT -8
We won't be going back to the WAC. Absolutely not. Not until you fix your football program. After that, maybe. Yoda out... ;D. That's a good one. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 13, 2010 20:54:07 GMT -8
Would SDSU really be better off in a Big-16 with KU, K State, Mizzou, etc? We would have a hell of a time making even a minor bowl in FB (given the increased membership and the limited bowl tie-ins). Furthermore, we would also have a tough time making the NCAAS in basketball; remember, some fo the "left-over" Big-12 members may not be much in football, but in hoops they are not chopped liver.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecTom on Jun 13, 2010 21:04:34 GMT -8
Would SDSU really be better off in a Big-16 with KU, K State, Mizzou, etc? We would have a hell of a time making even a minor bowl in FB (given the increased membership and the limited bowl tie-ins). Furthermore, we would also have a tough time making the NCAAS in basketball; remember, some fo the "left-over" Big-12 members may not be much in football, but in hoops they are not chopped liver. AzWm I disagree with you William. By getting Boise St and if we get these former Big-12 teams this is going to raise the level of our program and we will be bringing in better recruits across the board. |
|
.
