Who wanted Boise in the MWC in 2008?

[The Aztec Panther]

The topic of adding Boise State to the MWC was brought up several times back around 2007 & 2008. I was one of the people who thought it was a good idea.

There were some who thought that since their Basketball program wasn't very good they shouldn't get the MWC invite, though.

Now I've got to wonder - would having Boise in the MWC effective 2009 (after a 2008 invite) have made a difference in the recent shake-up?

With 4 top 25 teams the MWC would have had a great argument as one of the very best conferences in the country. That certainly would have given them more leverage for a better TV deal and for a BCS automatic bid.

Would that have made any difference to Utah? With the MWC on the rise, and the Pac-10 not looking much better (if at all), would Utah have jumped ship?

Yeah, I know - Boise was added prior to Utah jumping. But had they been in the conference last season there might have been a different perception of the MWC nationally. Would that perception (along with all the other positives that come from having 4 top 25 teams) have been enough?

I've just got to think that had the MWC leadership been proactive Utah might have thought twice about going to the Pac-32. If they believed that the leadership of the conference was dynamic and forward thinking towards growth (improving the MWC's stature, financially and competitively) maybe they wouldn't have felt the need to jump to the, "Bigger," conference.

[Fred Noonan]

Some interesting points but my thougt is it wouldn't have made any difference. It's about the money and they would be leaving way, way too much on the table. Remember, the MWC TV package means about $1M and a BCS share about 1.7M + while the PacWhatever TV deal is $10-15M (depending on who you talk to).

So, too much $$ to tun down.

The Fred Noonan School of Navigation.

[The Aztec Panther]

Jun 19, 2010 8:56:33 GMT -8 Fred Noonan said:

Some interesting points but my thougt is it wouldn't have made any difference. It's about the money and they would be leaving way, way too much on the table. Remember, the MWC TV package means about $1M and a BCS share about 1.7M + while the PacWhatever TV deal is $10-15M (depending on who you talk to).

So, too much $$ to tun down.

But wouldn't the MWC have been in a much better position to come up with a more lucrative TV deal after last season had Boise actually been in the conference for 2009? The gap in money wouldn't have been quite as wide.

Maybe it still would have been enough to get Utah to jump ship, but if they honestly believed that the conference leadership was good and moving the conference to a position where they would have been competitive with the Pac-10 in 4 or 5 years wouldn't that have given them a good reason to stay?

I don't know. I just think that the MWC leadership has been too passive - and not adding Boise State sooner (when they were obviously interested) made that clear.

[texasaztec]

A couple of points. Either TCU or BSU would have had 1 loss as they would have had to play against each other during the regular season. You KNOW the pollsters would have dropped either significantly in rankings. Also, the numbers, even with a renegotiated TV contract would not have added up to what the Pac 10 is able to offer. Utah jumped for the money and adding BSU wouldn't not have had a significant impact financially to keep them.

[steveaztec]

I don't remember exactly how I felt about it in 2008, but I think I would have supported it.

[jdaztec]

I did and who knows ?

[aztecsrule72001]

I think it was better to exclude them, BSU was able to establish themselves, especially as a National name. It would have been a lot harder to do as well in MWC.

Utah would have left either way, when all is said and done it comes down to money, and the Pac offers a lot more of it. If the MWC was even close to competitive monetarily it would have been different imo, or at least a much more difficult decision.

[McQuervo]

McQ

[wakelaunch]

I did for sure, great fans. Great place to visit. Would probably travel pretty well. More excitement into the league then even Utah. Utah is boring. I would have liked to have both but I would definitely rather have Boise.

[choop]

TV pay days are more about TV markets. Even if the MWC TV deal could be trippled, it would mean $3 million compared to $15 million. No way any MWC team could earn enough money to stop it from moving to the PAC-10.

[brokencurse]

I'll own up. I'm one of the ones who wasn't crazy about Boise St. They are a great program TODAY. I just don't know about their long term viability. I mean, we're talking Boise State after all. They do A LOT with very LITTLE. That is hard to sustain. If Boise's program fell back to mediocrity, which really isn't a stretch looking long term, what's the love with Boise all about? Academics? No. Market? No. Other sports? No. It's all about a great football team today.

All that said, they are very good, have managed to be very good under several different coaches, and the timing was probably perfect for adding them.

[AztecWilliam]

It is very important, if not downright essential, that Boise State make a huge statement this season. One preview magazine ranks them SECOND for 2010. A Top-10 finish for Boise State this year will give them a boost as they enter the conference.

As has been mentioned, in 2011 the MWC will be very competitive, and that will make it very hard for Boise, or any other school, to run the table.

Boise's long-term prospects puzzle me, too. I don't think they will fizzle, but 10 or 11 win seasons may prove a bit difficult in the MWC. It's possible that in a couple of years there may be only a couple of dogs in the MWC. (By the way, I am not counting SDSU as one of the dogs!) If that's correct, finishing 8-0, or even 7-1 in conference will be a daunting task.

AzWm

[Bob Forsythe]

I've never been totally thrilled with them because they don't have a baseball program, aren't all that good in any sport other than football and will provide the mountain goat schools with another reliable vote.

=Bob

[sdsuphilip]

Jun 19, 2010 20:42:32 GMT -8 John, Your Pal said:

I'm still not sure we should have added Boise.

If we want to be a BCS league, we need to add programs that fit the BCS profile (or come as close as possible to it), and there's a lot more to the BCS profile than winning WAC games.

yes there is, and BSU has done a lot more than just beating WAC teams.

[The Aztec Panther]

Jun 19, 2010 21:12:35 GMT -8 sdsuphilip said:

Jun 19, 2010 20:42:32 GMT -8 John, Your Pal said:

I'm still not sure we should have added Boise.

If we want to be a BCS league, we need to add programs that fit the BCS profile (or come as close as possible to it), and there's a lot more to the BCS profile than winning WAC games.

yes there is, and BSU has done a lot more than just beating WAC teams.

Yeah, like winning BCS Bowl games, for one thing...

[k5james]

Jun 19, 2010 8:56:33 GMT -8 Fred Noonan said:

Some interesting points but my thougt is it wouldn't have made any difference. It's about the money and they would be leaving way, way too much on the table. Remember, the MWC TV package means about $1M and a BCS share about 1.7M + while the PacWhatever TV deal is $10-15M (depending on who you talk to).

So, too much $$ to tun down.

The Fred Noonan School of Navigation.

Exactly, BSU has ZERO to do with Utah staying or leaving.

I didn't want them in '07, '08 or '09. I didn't even want them this year but adding them NOW is definitely a great move as they replace what we lost with Utah.

I have a feeling that's why the MWC presidents had the change of heart after a week.

[hoobs]

I think I have been a proponent of Boise for a while. But, looking at the math, it might be better off the way it turned out in the end. Rather than have them competing vs the MWC the next couple years, their numbers should be even higher staying in the WAC... then having their numbers transfer over 'just in time' for the evaluation period.

We'll probably add the 10th team (extend the invite) either next summer or the year after.

[aztecwin]

Glad BSU is with us now. Don't remember about that prior time. I do know I have always wanted Hawaii and Fresno back.

[Old School]

SDSU and Boise do have a victory over Oklahoma.



Oldie Out

[83aztec]

I did not want them then. Other than football they did not add much and they have no baseball team. I thought they would have only taken money from SDSU back then. Happy to have them now