|
|
Post by sdsuaztecs on Jun 27, 2010 19:04:31 GMT -8
BYU is not going anywhere and certainly not leaving the MWC if AQ status is right around the corner. Once the MWC gains AQ status to the BCS I think the conference should expand immediately to add more tv sets/advertising money and a playoff game.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jun 27, 2010 19:25:17 GMT -8
I think going independent would be football suicide. Did not work for us before when we were in a better position than now. No one has offered a reason why it would be different now. If the MWC goes away I would much rather be in the WAC than be a quitter. The Aztecs dominated the PCAA for years and we had very good crowds at the Murph. More than we do now in the MWC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2010 12:26:42 GMT -8
Fan1, I don't care a whit about BYU except that as long as we're in the Mountain West Conference, we need them to be too. For survival of the conference's TV network if nothing else. You don't care about BYU?  Go back and read the way you started this thread. They need MWC as much or more than SDSU does. I highly doubt BYU needs the MWC as much as SDSU does. 1. They have a national following; we don't. 2. They have their own TV network; we don't. 3. Since the MWC was created, they've won 89 games, including 15 against BCS schools; we've won 43 games and just one against a BCS school. 4. They consistently average more than 58K fans per game; last year, we sold an average of 24K tickets per game and there were generally 7K less butts in the seat than that. The bottom line is they could go independent and survive, if not prosper; we can't think of anything like that except as a desperation move. |
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodAztec on Jun 28, 2010 14:05:36 GMT -8
You don't care about BYU? Go back and read the way you started this thread. They need MWC as much or more than SDSU does. I highly doubt BYU needs the MWC as much as SDSU does. 1. They have a national following; we don't. 2. They have their own TV network; we don't. 3. Since the MWC was created, they've won 89 games, including 15 against BCS schools; we've won 43 games and just one against a BCS school. 4. They consistently average more than 58K fans per game; last year, we sold an average of 24K tickets per game and there were generally 7K less butts in the seat than that. The bottom line is they could go independent and survive, if not prosper; we can't think of anything like that except as a desperation move. I think there are very few advantages for YBU leaving our league to go independent. What they are is anybody’s guess. Wouldn’t their departure leave them with less than $1.2 million in their revenue? They may have a national following but that accounts for less than 7 million people nationwide. In addition, I seriously doubt every LDS household subscribes to the YBU network. And probably not every LDS member is a big YBU fan either. Case in point, I’ve met female LDS members from southern states who are huge fans of SEC schools but occasionally follow YBU even though they attended YBU, which I thought was odd. Whether this is true for many LDS who grew up rooting for their local schools before attending YBU or not, I’m not sure. IMHO, going independent is not as easy or lucrative as it used to be unless you’re Notre Dame. Even ND has lost some of it luster. If there’s any school that would succeed in going indie, it would be Texass – not YBU. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 28, 2010 16:31:02 GMT -8
I don't see them going anywhere. They will always get the LDS kids, but moving to the Big 12 would require them to get a lot more players of the beefy type and with that honor code, I don't see that happening. What non-LDS player is going to play there if he knows he'll get tossed outta school if he gets laid?
=Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by 83aztec on Jun 28, 2010 19:26:32 GMT -8
Why worry about this. Nothing will happem for awhile and even if it did there is nothing SDSU can do about it. At least we can be part of the WAC if all else fails.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Jun 28, 2010 21:41:42 GMT -8
You don't care about BYU? Go back and read the way you started this thread. They need MWC as much or more than SDSU does. I highly doubt BYU needs the MWC as much as SDSU does. 1. They have a national following; we don't. 2. They have their own TV network; we don't. 3. Since the MWC was created, they've won 89 games, including 15 against BCS schools; we've won 43 games and just one against a BCS school. 4. They consistently average more than 58K fans per game; last year, we sold an average of 24K tickets per game and there were generally 7K less butts in the seat than that. The bottom line is they could go independent and survive, if not prosper; we can't think of anything like that except as a desperation move. Tell me the name of the last school that left a conference and went independent? You can't be serious. Conferences are where the money is. You couldn't even schedule anyone (other than D-2s) starting in October. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 28, 2010 21:45:42 GMT -8
I'm going out on a limb here and speak up for Tom Craft. Well, a word or two, anyway. I agree that Tom was a poor choice for HC. The guy really was reluctant to take the job and surely wishes that he hadn't been talked into taking the gig after initially expressing doubts. Remember, they pretty much came after him. This wasn't like a go-getter such as Franchione campaigning for a position. More importantly, there were some very good coaches with experience that SDSU apparently wanted nothing to do with.
And, until Hoke really gets things going, Tom still has the best yearly record (6-6) out of the past 11 seasons on the Mesa. And the last wins over BYU and Utah, and a very close lose to TCU.
Long was a much worse choice if for no other reason than that the school was in worse shape by 2006. Tom rubbed people the wrong way, so much so that he does not even get credit for what little he did accomplish. That "little" still outshines Tollner's lasts years and all the years since then.
I hope I will not have to hold this view for much longer.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by haleiwaaztec on Jun 29, 2010 7:20:57 GMT -8
Based on the 25% kicker the MWC gets by having only nine teams, it appears to me that the MWC will become an AQ in 2012 if..........Boise, BYUI and/or TCU rank in the Top 10 meaning an automatic invite to the BCS in 2010 and 2011. If any of these teams makes the Top 10 the MWC will get the AQ in 2012 to the BCS. So what are the odds one MWC team gets into the Top 10 the next two years? IMO....at least 50-50. TCU returns 16 starters from a team which lost only to Boise last year. Boise, whose 2010 season can be counted by the MWC toward AQ status in 2012, returns 20 starters from a team which was undefeated. The keys in 2010 are the following: 1. Oregon State: Both play the beav, which Phil Steele has as just a middle-of-the-Pac school this year. 2. VA Tech, which Boise plays at Landover, MD to open the season. 3. And as usual for TCU, BYU and Utah. I didn't think about this, but having BYU & TCU take out Utah this year will help us in that it will raise up the MWC #s and take down the Pac 10 #s. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2010 7:45:33 GMT -8
I didn't think about this, but having BYU & TCU take out Utah this year will help us in that it will raise up the MWC #s and take down the Pac 10 #s. I started a thread last week saying that for that same reason, Utah on Nov. 20 should be considered the biggest game of the year for THE AZTECS. Others said Missouri but we have much less likelihood to win that one. Not only is it on the road whereas Utah is at Qualcomm but we get the Utes sandwiched between their first ever trip to South Bend and what might be their last game in years against BYU. Under those circumstances they could be flat as a pancake for us. |
|
