|
|
Post by jp92grad on Jun 27, 2024 7:02:44 GMT -8
Bottom line just look at the MWC now as compared to say 5-10+ years ago. Do you see anything that really says possible growth? positive future? ANYTHING! This guy was in charge of the conference for over 20 years and what does the MWC really have to show for his work? Numerous BCS and Sweet 16 appearances for one thing. Its not his fault the three most valuable properties left. Boise was supposed to provide Football cache, but they failed. He did the best he could with the hand he was dealt by the Conference Presidents and AD's. Talking about the last 10 or so years, those teams (Utah, BYU and TCU) left back around 2010-12, since that time not much was done as a conference. The last 10 years* this conference does not have much to show for it and that is an issue of leadership. The best thing going for the Mountain West has been the SDSU Basketball program and we have seen how this conference shows little to no support of SDSU. Just saying it was another example of someone on the backside of his career not putting forth a serious effort to improve the conference. ---Not looking to argue the point just wishing SDSU was in a better position or conference. *https://themw.com/mountain-west-chronology/ |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Jun 27, 2024 8:22:17 GMT -8
Which schools would the Mountain West backfill with? My guess: UTEP, New Mexico State & "2" from among FCS members Montana, Montana State, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, Sacramento State, UC Davis, Idaho & Weber State. I would not be deeply surprised if many of these teams drop football altogether. The expense isnt worth it anymore thanks to all the greed crap. |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jun 27, 2024 11:05:19 GMT -8
Which schools would the Mountain West backfill with? My guess: UTEP, New Mexico State & "2" from among FCS members Montana, Montana State, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, Sacramento State, UC Davis, Idaho & Weber State. Hypothetically, nearly all FCS schools would need to make substantial increases to their athletic budgets, add additional sports programs, meet minimum stadium capacity requirements, and, crucially, pay the NCAA $5 million to transition to the FBS level. However, if expansion is driven by networks like ESPN, CBS, and FOX, these schools face a significant challenge: their markets lack the substantial population bases and TV household scale needed to attract national advertisers and sponsors. Hypothetically, from an FCS football perspective, Montana, South Dakota State, and North Dakota State have been among the top performers. From an FBS standpoint, potential invitees could include schools from CUSA, particularly UTEP and NMSU. However, in my opinion, these schools offer limited value as they cover the same TV DMA. Both institutions are land-grant universities with enrollments exceeding 20,000 students, both would jump at the chance to move into the MWC. From an analytical perspective, if the MWC seeks to strengthen its presence in Texas, options beyond UTEP are limited. Rice and UTSA from the AAC are likely to remain in the AAC due to higher revenue potential, especially if the MWC loses 4-6 schools. North Texas State may also stay in place, leaving Texas State, with its 38,000+ students in San Marcos, TX, as a viable option. Texas State, a land-grant university, currently competes in the Sun Belt conference. Geographically, Sam Houston State (CUSA) with over 20,000 students and FBS status presents another possibility. The remaining Texas options include ASUN/WAC schools, now part of the United Athletic Conference, such as Abilene Christian and Stephen F. Austin. However, these schools, with smaller campuses and enrollments, offer limited value to both the FBS and the MWC. From a California perspective, if SDSU and Fresno State depart from the MWC, potential replacements could include UC Davis or Sacramento State. Both schools are located in the Sacramento DMA, the 20th largest TV market, with over 1.5 million TV households. This market size significantly surpasses that of the Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho schools combined. From a television standpoint in today's broadcast economics, none of these options are truly desirable for ESPN, FOX, CBS or even NBC. The MWC less 4-6 schools becomes as interesting as CUSA or the WAC on a national scale. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 27, 2024 11:27:28 GMT -8
Which schools would the Mountain West backfill with? My guess: UTEP, New Mexico State & "2" from among FCS members Montana, Montana State, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, Sacramento State, UC Davis, Idaho & Weber State. Hypothetically, nearly all FCS schools would need to make substantial increases to their athletic budgets, add additional sports programs, meet minimum stadium capacity requirements, and, crucially, pay the NCAA $5 million to transition to the FBS level. However, if expansion is driven by networks like ESPN, CBS, and FOX, these schools face a significant challenge: their markets lack the substantial population bases and TV household scale needed to attract national advertisers and sponsors. Hypothetically, from an FCS football perspective, Montana, South Dakota State, and North Dakota State have been among the top performers. From an FBS standpoint, potential invitees could include schools from CUSA, particularly UTEP and NMSU. However, in my opinion, these schools offer limited value as they cover the same TV DMA. Both institutions are land-grant universities with enrollments exceeding 20,000 students, both would jump at the chance to move into the MWC. From an analytical perspective, if the MWC seeks to strengthen its presence in Texas, options beyond UTEP are limited. Rice and UTSA from the AAC are likely to remain in the AAC due to higher revenue potential, especially if the MWC loses 4-6 schools. North Texas State may also stay in place, leaving Texas State, with its 38,000+ students in San Marcos, TX, as a viable option. Texas State, a land-grant university, currently competes in the Sun Belt conference. Geographically, Sam Houston State (CUSA) with over 20,000 students and FBS status presents another possibility. The remaining Texas options include ASUN/WAC schools, now part of the United Athletic Conference, such as Abilene Christian and Stephen F. Austin. However, these schools, with smaller campuses and enrollments, offer limited value to both the FBS and the MWC. From a California perspective, if SDSU and Fresno State depart from the MWC, potential replacements could include UC Davis or Sacramento State. Both schools are located in the Sacramento DMA, the 20th largest TV market, with over 1.5 million TV households. This market size significantly surpasses that of the Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho schools combined. From a television standpoint in today's broadcast economics, none of these options are truly desirable. The FCS teams aren't affected by NIL since they don't compete for players who sign with the FBS teams. So for them it's business as usual. In fact, they should sue the NCAA if they try to make them pay their players because of NIL. |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jun 27, 2024 12:44:09 GMT -8
Hypothetically, nearly all FCS schools would need to make substantial increases to their athletic budgets, add additional sports programs, meet minimum stadium capacity requirements, and, crucially, pay the NCAA $5 million to transition to the FBS level. However, if expansion is driven by networks like ESPN, CBS, and FOX, these schools face a significant challenge: their markets lack the substantial population bases and TV household scale needed to attract national advertisers and sponsors. Hypothetically, from an FCS football perspective, Montana, South Dakota State, and North Dakota State have been among the top performers. From an FBS standpoint, potential invitees could include schools from CUSA, particularly UTEP and NMSU. However, in my opinion, these schools offer limited value as they cover the same TV DMA. Both institutions are land-grant universities with enrollments exceeding 20,000 students, both would jump at the chance to move into the MWC. From an analytical perspective, if the MWC seeks to strengthen its presence in Texas, options beyond UTEP are limited. Rice and UTSA from the AAC are likely to remain in the AAC due to higher revenue potential, especially if the MWC loses 4-6 schools. North Texas State may also stay in place, leaving Texas State, with its 38,000+ students in San Marcos, TX, as a viable option. Texas State, a land-grant university, currently competes in the Sun Belt conference. Geographically, Sam Houston State (CUSA) with over 20,000 students and FBS status presents another possibility. The remaining Texas options include ASUN/WAC schools, now part of the United Athletic Conference, such as Abilene Christian and Stephen F. Austin. However, these schools, with smaller campuses and enrollments, offer limited value to both the FBS and the MWC. From a California perspective, if SDSU and Fresno State depart from the MWC, potential replacements could include UC Davis or Sacramento State. Both schools are located in the Sacramento DMA, the 20th largest TV market, with over 1.5 million TV households. This market size significantly surpasses that of the Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho schools combined. From a television standpoint in today's broadcast economics, none of these options are truly desirable. The FCS teams aren't affected by NIL since they don't compete for players who sign with the FBS teams. So for them it's business as usual. In fact, they should sue the NCAA if they try to make them pay their players because of NIL. The NCAA places minimum limits on things like stadium capacity, minimum number of sports teams to meet FBS standards (Olympic sports) and then wants a $5MM pay-in, so none of these budget increases are for NIL and to pay student athletes. In the past the NCAA tried to set a competitive balance within conferences, which went out the window with transfer portals and NIL allowances. |
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Jun 27, 2024 13:14:58 GMT -8
Which schools would the Mountain West backfill with? My guess: UTEP, New Mexico State & "2" from among FCS members Montana, Montana State, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, Sacramento State, UC Davis, Idaho & Weber State. There has been a ton of discussion about this on the NMSU board. Honestly, if the MWC were to lose 9 members (getting a 3/4 majority vote to dissolve the conference), I'm not positive that NMSU and UTEP would be interested. We're in a stable conference for the first time in many years, it's a conference that we can be competitive in - in every sport, and we're in the best financial situation we've ever been in, with more national TV exposure than we've ever had. Last year alone, our first year in the conference, we had two home games on national TV plus our away game at UTEP on national TV, along with our shocking beatdown of Auburn and the CUSA championship game at Liberty. We've never been on national TV that many times in one year. The only slight bummer for us is most of the conference is southeast-based. Our basketball tourney last year was in Huntsville, Alabama, and will be there again this upcoming season. That doesn't fare particularly well for us. Much would depend on who the three remaining MWC schools are. If UNM is one of the three there might be a chance. Say UNM gets left out. Who are the other two? Hawaii? USU? Nevada? A MWC made up of NMSU, UTEP, UNM, USU, Nevada, plus a few FCS move-ups out of the list you provided might be somewhat attractive to us. BUT...would that really be better than CUSA that has given us a lot of stability that we haven't seen since the Big West days, and more national TV exposure than we have ever seen. If UNM gets invited as part of the PAC expansion, all bets are off. There is nothing that would make a rebuilt MWC more attractive than the current CUSA. Even then, UNM being available as a possible conference mate, and therefore having NMSU, UNM, and UTEP all in the same conference, isn't guaranteed to make it happen either. If you are familiar with how much NMSU and UNM like to crap all over each other at every opportunity, that might not be the best idea. UNM even crapped all over NMSU at the New Mexico Bowl last year, while trying to put on a pretty public face as the most gracious hosts ever. Now...if somehow only say 6 of the MWC schools end up in a rebuilt PAC, a conference consisting of NMSU, UTEP, UNM, USU, Nevada, Hawaii, Wyoming, Air Force, plus maybe Sam Houston and a couple FCS move-ups would be incredibly attractive. Throw UTA in there to offset Hawaii's football only status. It would be much more regional, better travel for everyone involved, evenly balanced competitively, and lots of great natural rivalries. Would that command a better TV deal than CUSA? Perhaps it would. We were conference mates with some of those schools in both the Big West and the WAC for a lot of years. Aggie fans would no doubt much prefer seeing Air Force and Wyoming roll into town than Middle Tennessee and Keenesaw State. I would personally love to see it play out this way, but that's the pipe dream. I just don't see it happening. Of course nobody saw the PAC-12 being in its current predicament happening either. |
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Jun 27, 2024 13:27:02 GMT -8
Which schools would the Mountain West backfill with? My guess: UTEP, New Mexico State & "2" from among FCS members Montana, Montana State, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, Sacramento State, UC Davis, Idaho & Weber State. Hypothetically, nearly all FCS schools would need to make substantial increases to their athletic budgets, add additional sports programs, meet minimum stadium capacity requirements, and, crucially, pay the NCAA $5 million to transition to the FBS level. However, if expansion is driven by networks like ESPN, CBS, and FOX, these schools face a significant challenge: their markets lack the substantial population bases and TV household scale needed to attract national advertisers and sponsors. Hypothetically, from an FCS football perspective, Montana, South Dakota State, and North Dakota State have been among the top performers. From an FBS standpoint, potential invitees could include schools from CUSA, particularly UTEP and NMSU. However, in my opinion, these schools offer limited value as they cover the same TV DMA. Both institutions are land-grant universities with enrollments exceeding 20,000 students, both would jump at the chance to move into the MWC. From an analytical perspective, if the MWC seeks to strengthen its presence in Texas, options beyond UTEP are limited. Rice and UTSA from the AAC are likely to remain in the AAC due to higher revenue potential, especially if the MWC loses 4-6 schools. North Texas State may also stay in place, leaving Texas State, with its 38,000+ students in San Marcos, TX, as a viable option. Texas State, a land-grant university, currently competes in the Sun Belt conference. Geographically, Sam Houston State (CUSA) with over 20,000 students and FBS status presents another possibility. The remaining Texas options include ASUN/WAC schools, now part of the United Athletic Conference, such as Abilene Christian and Stephen F. Austin. However, these schools, with smaller campuses and enrollments, offer limited value to both the FBS and the MWC. From a California perspective, if SDSU and Fresno State depart from the MWC, potential replacements could include UC Davis or Sacramento State. Both schools are located in the Sacramento DMA, the 20th largest TV market, with over 1.5 million TV households. This market size significantly surpasses that of the Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho schools combined. From a television standpoint in today's broadcast economics, none of these options are truly desirable for ESPN, FOX, CBS or even NBC. The MWC less 4-6 schools becomes as interesting as CUSA or the WAC on a national scale. Small corrections: UTEP is not a land grant university. NMSU is - it was originally established as "NM Agricultural College in 1888" and later became New Mexico A&M, until it became NMSU in 1960. NMSU's enrollment is just a little over 14K. There are a few other campuses in the NMSU "system," but those are basically JC's - they only offer AA degrees and certificates. If you include total enrollment of the system it is around 23k, but NMSU Alamogordo for example is no more a part of NMSU's enrollment than Palomar College is a part of SDSU's. UTEP is considerably larger than NMSU. They have just under 24k students, and unlike NMSU, they don't have a bunch of extension campuses. NMSU's DMA is a little bit tricky. Being located 45 minutes from El Paso, we are technically in El Paso's DMA. El Paso has population around 750k, and there's another 120k in Las Cruces. However, more NMSU fans live in Albuquerque than in Las Cruces. It's a bigger city with more jobs than Las Cruces. So in reality we bring in a good chunk of the Albuquerque DMA as well. Of course that's a moot point if NMSU, UNM, and UTEP are all in the same conference. What could make a little bit of a difference is the three of those are pretty intense rivals which could make for some good TV viewing. NMSU and UNM flat out despise each other. That's a rivalry so nasty that even the bands hate each other. NMSU and UTEP are intense rivals being that they're only 45 minutes apart, but they're also relatively civil to each other. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 27, 2024 15:47:52 GMT -8
The FCS teams aren't affected by NIL since they don't compete for players who sign with the FBS teams. So for them it's business as usual. In fact, they should sue the NCAA if they try to make them pay their players because of NIL. The NCAA places minimum limits on things like stadium capacity, minimum number of sports teams to meet FBS standards (Olympic sports) and then wants a $5MM pay-in, so none of these budget increases are for NIL and to pay student athletes. In the past the NCAA tried to set a competitive balance within conferences, which went out the window with transfer portals and NIL allowances. You're assuming if they transition to FBS. Suppose they don't want to? |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jun 28, 2024 16:56:26 GMT -8
I don't care, just get us out of this chickenshit conference!
|
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Jun 28, 2024 17:48:20 GMT -8
I don't care, just get us out of this chickenshit conference! I'd rather play resurrected teams from Azusa Pacific, Los Angeles State, UOP and Mexico Poly than stay in the Miserable Weeniferous Conference. |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jun 28, 2024 19:26:14 GMT -8
The NCAA places minimum limits on things like stadium capacity, minimum number of sports teams to meet FBS standards (Olympic sports) and then wants a $5MM pay-in, so none of these budget increases are for NIL and to pay student athletes. In the past the NCAA tried to set a competitive balance within conferences, which went out the window with transfer portals and NIL allowances. You're assuming if they transition to FBS. Suppose they don't want to? As you saw, my post was Hypothetical, not an absolute or recommendation or even a suggestion. Of course FCS schools are not mandated to move up, but most have aspirations to drive income. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 28, 2024 21:22:53 GMT -8
The Presidents wanted a yes man and that is what he did - someone that could get a long with many but little backbone The new one is far superior and maybe the new PAC tries to hire her They currently have Teresa Gould as their commissioner. She has a much tougher job to pull off. Expansion plans and negotiating media contracts. |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Jun 28, 2024 21:30:48 GMT -8
I don't care, just get us out of this chickenshit conference! I'd rather play resurrected teams from Azusa Pacific, Los Angeles State, UOP and Mexico Poly than stay in the Miserable Weeniferous Conference. Not sure I'd include Mexico Poly. That was one of worst teams I've ever seen the Aztecs play against. I'd add a resurrected Long Beach State (definately) and UC Santa Barbara. |
|
