|
|
Post by aztecfankrishnan on Jun 15, 2010 8:56:59 GMT -8
I agree...Houston would be a natural fit if Utah leaves. Huge TV market. houston would be a good add,they would pair with TCU.houston is the 4th largest city in america and large tv market which equals money for the conference.need to keep tcu happy or they might bolt and this confenece will never be a bcs conference losing the two most successful teams recently plus small tv markets and only 9 schools wont get us an auto bcs bid. big 12 is 10 right now and might try to actually add houston and poach tcu away to get to 12 again. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 8:58:20 GMT -8
SGF, Never said it was recurring $$$. No, but that's how most of us read it. Thanks for the clarification. As if there was any doubt, it looks like announcement of Utah to the Pac is a mere formality: utah.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1094386 |
|
|
|
Post by greysuit on Jun 15, 2010 9:05:59 GMT -8
SGF, Never said it was recurring $$$. The entry $$$$ offset the reduction in revenues for the next few years on a per team basis. If you assume the MWC does NOT get into the BCS party in a few years,.....yeah, you're right on the money. My guess is if Utah leaves the MWC could use another $3.0 million right now. And a 12-team MWC with Houston, Fresno and maybe Nevada should command more money from Comcast when the new tv contract comes up.......especially if the MWC is in the BCS by then. The Mtn west would probably not let them keep that deal and require them to play all their games on the Mtn. |
|
|
|
Post by Fred Noonan on Jun 15, 2010 9:12:29 GMT -8
Seems to me that there are two levels to this debate: The unknowable and personal preference. By unknowable I mean the financial impact of expansion, be it Fresno or someone else. This whole thing is driven by $$, yet those of us on these boards have very little insight as to the reality of it all. We can argue it all we want, but we do not know. Having spent some time in the past on the SDSU "financial picture," trust me you just don't know as these institutions do not practice the same kind of accounting that we in the private enterprise world do. I believe the bottom line is as said, if the pie is divided into smaller pieces it ain't gonna happen. If, however, the $$ really do pencil out then there will be an expansion. My guess--and it's only that--is that the $$ do not pencil out. Reason for my guess is that the MWC resisted expansion all along until it became clear to them that they would either (a) lose Utah or (b) be in a position to grab some Big 12 teams in which case picking up Boise became imperative. On the personal preference front, being a geezer and attendee at the famed Fog Bowl I would love to see Fresno St. back in the fold. Finally, a rival that I can truly dislike. Fresno St. would be good for SDSU, but that is of course a personal preference. And since the concept of personal preference is what makes it go I would also add Hawaii. Only because I like the road trips, so don't get started on the anti-Hawaii debate that goes along the line of jettisoning June Jones, no committment, etc. A good roadie is a good roadie, end of story. And since all of this is out of my control I might as well get a good road trip and a few mai tai's out of it. The Fred Noonan School of Navigation.  |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuaztecs on Jun 15, 2010 9:23:27 GMT -8
I look at expansion as a matter of survival for the MWC. Keeping Fresno out of the MWC denies SDSU and Fresno fans of a natural rivalry and lots of fans in the seats. What's the purpose of college sports if it is all about $$$$ and nothing else? That's why you schedule teams like Nicholls State....not because you want to elevate the competition but because you need the bucks. Fresno and Houston make sense for the MWC in a number of areas not the least of which is a better chance of getting an AQ to the BCS. And once AQ status is attained, the MWC will be a lot more stable and far less vulnerable to pillaging by the PAC-12 or anyone else.
|
|
|
|
Post by greysuit on Jun 15, 2010 9:26:40 GMT -8
I look at expansion as a matter of survival for the MWC. Keeping Fresno out of the MWC denies SDSU and Fresno fans of a natrual rivalry and lots of fans in the seats. What's the purpose of college sports if it is all about $$$$ and nothing else? That's why you schedule teams like Nicholls State....not because you want to elevate the competition but because you need the bucks. Fresno and Houston make sense for the MWC in a number of areas not the least of which is a better chance of getting an AQ to the BCS. Do you really think SDSU vs Fresno sells more tickets at the Q than SDSU vs UNLV? More tickets will be sold and rivalries will mean something only when teams play well. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuaztecs on Jun 15, 2010 9:30:04 GMT -8
Are you kidding? Absolutely more butts are in the stands for Fresno compared to UNLV. Fresno alone would mean at least 10,000 more Fresno fans and probably another 5,000 to 10,000 Aztec fans. So figure maybe 15k to 20k more fans for Fresno.
|
|
|
|
Post by MarchingAztecsAlum on Jun 15, 2010 9:32:47 GMT -8
I would be ok with either Fresno or Houston being admitted into the MWC. The only school I would say no to would have to be Hawai'i. Their football program is questionable and I feel is heading in the wrong direction with their current coaching staff, and their basketball program is terrible and will be for a while. Granted it's a nice trip but the headaches of having to travel to the islands isn't worth what the UH is offering at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by greysuit on Jun 15, 2010 9:34:42 GMT -8
Are you kidding? Absolutely more butts are in the stands for Fresno compared to UNLV. Fresno alone would mean at least 10,000 more Fresno fans and probably another 5,000 to 10,000 Aztec fans. So figure maybe 15k to 20k more fans for Fresno. BYU does not even generate that kind of additional ticket sales here and I guarantee that the LDS population here is much larger than the Fresno State Alumni population. |
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Jun 15, 2010 9:36:41 GMT -8
SGF, Never said it was recurring $$$. No, but that's how most of us read it. Thanks for the clarification. As if there was any doubt, it looks like announcement of Utah to the Pac is a mere formality: utah.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1094386That source has pretty much no credibility on the MWC Board. He's been saying it's a done deal for a while now. If it's such a done deal why would he throw this in at the end? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 9:40:24 GMT -8
I look at expansion as a matter of survival for the MWC. Keeping Fresno out of the MWC denies SDSU and Fresno fans of a natrual rivalry and lots of fans in the seats. What's the purpose of college sports if it is all about $$$$ and nothing else? That's why you schedule teams like Nicholls State....not because you want to elevate the competition but because you need the bucks. Fresno and Houston make sense for the MWC in a number of areas not the least of which is a better chance of getting an AQ to the BCS. Do you really think SDSU vs Fresno sells more tickets at the Q than SDSU vs UNLV? More tickets will be sold and rivalries will mean something only when teams play well. There are still lots of folks around here that remember the PCAA days fondly and Fresno was our big rival. The first really big cox arena attendance as I recall was when Tark brought the bulldogs in. Lots of Fresnekians at that one to. But this is all ancient history and as we all know, it's no longer about tradition and what the fans want. It's about the almighty TV dollar. |
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Jun 15, 2010 9:48:22 GMT -8
Do you really think SDSU vs Fresno sells more tickets at the Q than SDSU vs UNLV? More tickets will be sold and rivalries will mean something only when teams play well. There are still lots of folks around here that remember the PCAA days fondly and Fresno was our big rival. The first really big cox arena attendance as I recall was when Tark brought the bulldogs in. Lots of Fresnekians at that one to. But this is all ancient history and as we all know, it's no longer about tradition and what the fans want. It's about the almighty TV dollar. Most of you are one foot in the grave though.  We played zero times in the 80's and once in the 2000's. That doesn't seem like much a rivalry to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 9:52:17 GMT -8
There are still lots of folks around here that remember the PCAA days fondly and Fresno was our big rival. The first really big cox arena attendance as I recall was when Tark brought the bulldogs in. Lots of Fresnekians at that one to. But this is all ancient history and as we all know, it's no longer about tradition and what the fans want. It's about the almighty TV dollar. Most of you are one foot in the grave though. We played zero times in the 80's and once in the 2000's. That doesn't seem like much a rivalry to me. now that's just wrong ! I was but a young pup in those days but they were by far the best of times in terms of quality of football and community support. Me and pops used to sit in the garage and listen to Ron Reina call the game on a Heathkit radio "we" built. Great memories.. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuaztecs on Jun 15, 2010 9:56:25 GMT -8
If Utah leaves the MWC, standing pat with nine teams will guarantee the MWC is locked out of the BCS. The PAC-12 may have a better chance of getting a second team in the BCS than one for the MWC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 9:57:14 GMT -8
No, but that's how most of us read it. Thanks for the clarification. As if there was any doubt, it looks like announcement of Utah to the Pac is a mere formality: utah.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1094386That source has pretty much no credibility on the MWC Board. He's been saying it's a done deal for a while now. If it's such a done deal why would he throw this in at the end? I haven't really paid any attention to how the MWC board members feel about the site since it's so apparent to me that Utah will be leaving. Still, you make a great point. BTW, afan, having slept on it, I realize I took a cheat shot at you yesterday and I apologize. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 9:59:24 GMT -8
If Utah leaves the MWC, standing pat with nine teams will guarantee the MWC is locked out of the BCS. The PAC-12 may have a better chance of getting a second team in the BCS than one for the MWC. Most of us very much disagree with you on this. As to the BCS, I wish AztecBill would dig up his thread from the old board explaining how beneficial it has been for the MWC. It's a common perception that a playoff system would be better for SDSU but that isn't at all the case. |
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Jun 15, 2010 10:07:27 GMT -8
I know all this talk about Utah going to the PAC-10-11-12-?, (a move I think they'll regret even with the BIG BUCKS), and who/if is going to replace them. I still think, now that the Big 12 isn't going anywhere I still envision a scenerio where it's quite possible TCU is invited to join, (need that conference championship game), and if so they'll be gone yesterday. So it becomes +1/-2. I can't see the conference standing pat with 8 programs.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 15, 2010 10:14:11 GMT -8
Disagree. Show me the TV market coverage for Fresburg. They share with Stanfurd and Cal- no way does inclusion give the MWC a larger audience than the inclusion of Reno or Boise. Thats a program on the decline-Pat Hill has applied for every decent D-1 job in the west and can't wait to leave (and the Admin can't wait for him to get out as well). Add UNR. +1 for your fist 2 paragraphs. -1 for your close. Add UNR?  You must be spending too much time in the heat on your trips to the Valley. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 15, 2010 10:14:35 GMT -8
Utah moving to the PAC-12 enhances the status of the MWC simply because the Utes are part of the MWC. However, the MWC cannot stand pat with nine teams if AQ to the BCS is the goal. A 12-team MWC means less $$$$ per team for the short-run (2-3 years) but that amount of money is pretty insignifcant if the MWC gains AQ to the BCS say in 2012 or 2013. My guess is the MWC will have little hope of AQ to the BCS without adding more teams unless Utah decides to stay. Just adding teams does not instantly bring in more money, if the schools you bring in generate less money than the average MWC team (which most WAC schools do) then in a since the other schools make less money by having to split the pie into smaller pieces. Also adding a championship games is not a huge money maker unless you’re a major power conference and it is being played on one of the major networks and garners national attention (like the Big 12 and SEC championship games do). A MWC championship game would just be another game played on the Mtn which would not be available to most homes in the US. Agree. This is what I fear. . . adding another team just to be adding another team. The Pac-10/11 pretty much has to add a 12th. We in the MWC do not have to add any, and that's fine because Fresno is the logical choice and who is excited about adding Fresno? Does anyone have a clue as to what the MWC school presidents are thinking regarding this question? AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by greysuit on Jun 15, 2010 10:17:46 GMT -8
Just adding teams does not instantly bring in more money, if the schools you bring in generate less money than the average MWC team (which most WAC schools do) then in a since the other schools make less money by having to split the pie into smaller pieces. Also adding a championship games is not a huge money maker unless you’re a major power conference and it is being played on one of the major networks and garners national attention (like the Big 12 and SEC championship games do). A MWC championship game would just be another game played on the Mtn which would not be available to most homes in the US. Agree. This is what I fear. . . adding another team just to be adding another team. The Pac-10/11 pretty much has to add a 12th. We in the MWC do not have to add any, and that's fine because Fresno is the logical choice and who is excited about adding Fresno? Does anyone have a clue as to what the MWC school presidents are thinking regarding this question? AzWm I doubt they are looking to expand at this point unless the big 12 breaks apart and they can snag a Mizzou or a Kansas. Look at how long it took them to add Boise. |
|
houston would be a good add,they would pair with TCU.houston is the 4th largest city in america and large tv market which equals money for the conference.need to keep tcu happy or they might bolt and this confenece will never be a bcs conference losing the two most successful teams recently plus small tv markets and only 9 schools wont get us an auto bcs bid.
You must be spending too much time in the heat on your trips to the Valley.