|
|
Post by missiontrails on Jul 24, 2024 9:39:51 GMT -8
I'd take Nevada and San Jose before Tulane and Memphis. Mainly for geographic reasons, but other reasons as well. SJSU gets included in these discussions purely under the guise of being in a huge media market. Common sense would indicate that media market size shouldn't matter if nobody in that market is watching your games on TV. SJSU is third fiddle in their own market in CFB and 6th or 7th fiddle in basketball behind Santa Clara, St. Mary's, and USF. Their facilities are absolutely abysmal. You can't even give away tickets to most of their home football games. They were added to the MWC mostly because of market size but there were other schools that would have been a much better addition. A part of me would love to see a situation where half of the MWC goes to the PAC. That's for purely selfish reasons - obviously the 6 remaining MWC schools would need to add to stay viable, and the two obvious additions within its footprint are NMSU and UTEP. I posted earlier that I'm not sure it would be a slam dunk. CUSA is very stable right now and it's a conference made up of schools that all have similar athletics budgets ($20 - $25 million range). On the flip side, CUSA's media deal is only paying about $800k per school. Would a MWC consisting of NMSU, UTEP, UNM, Wyoming, Air Force, Nevada, Utah State, Hawaii, and say for argument's sake UTA to offset Hawaii's FB only membership pay significantly more than that? And I believe most of those schools are spending closer to $35 million on athletics. Would they reduce their spending a little, and would NMSU/UTEP increase theirs? I don't know the answers to those. The new MWC in this scenario is made up of a bunch of small market schools. The biggest remaining market would be El Paso/Las Cruces with a population of about 900K between them. I'm fully aware of SJSU's standing in the Bay Area. And nobody on this board, besides you, gives a flying fart about New Mexico St!  |
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Jul 24, 2024 10:05:52 GMT -8
SJSU gets included in these discussions purely under the guise of being in a huge media market. Common sense would indicate that media market size shouldn't matter if nobody in that market is watching your games on TV. SJSU is third fiddle in their own market in CFB and 6th or 7th fiddle in basketball behind Santa Clara, St. Mary's, and USF. Their facilities are absolutely abysmal. You can't even give away tickets to most of their home football games. They were added to the MWC mostly because of market size but there were other schools that would have been a much better addition. A part of me would love to see a situation where half of the MWC goes to the PAC. That's for purely selfish reasons - obviously the 6 remaining MWC schools would need to add to stay viable, and the two obvious additions within its footprint are NMSU and UTEP. I posted earlier that I'm not sure it would be a slam dunk. CUSA is very stable right now and it's a conference made up of schools that all have similar athletics budgets ($20 - $25 million range). On the flip side, CUSA's media deal is only paying about $800k per school. Would a MWC consisting of NMSU, UTEP, UNM, Wyoming, Air Force, Nevada, Utah State, Hawaii, and say for argument's sake UTA to offset Hawaii's FB only membership pay significantly more than that? And I believe most of those schools are spending closer to $35 million on athletics. Would they reduce their spending a little, and would NMSU/UTEP increase theirs? I don't know the answers to those. The new MWC in this scenario is made up of a bunch of small market schools. The biggest remaining market would be El Paso/Las Cruces with a population of about 900K between them. I'm fully aware of SJSU's standing in the Bay Area. And nobody on this board, besides you, gives a flying fart about New Mexico St! It's more about caring about the future of the MWC. I realize when/if it gets to that point the SDSU crowd won't care much because you won't be in the MWC any longer, but you should care because 6 schools left without a viable conference is bad for college sports in general. Nobody should be wishing for that. A 6-school MWC shouldn't find too much trouble finding schools to add, but the ugly reality is that we're running out of those schools and also running out of landing places for those who would be left. The WAC is on life support now and in serious danger of ceasing to exist. I would be pretty sad to see that conference fall apart, even though it's in our rear view mirror now and even further in SDSU's rear view mirror. |
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jul 24, 2024 10:38:47 GMT -8
I'm fully aware of SJSU's standing in the Bay Area. And nobody on this board, besides you, gives a flying fart about New Mexico St! It's more about caring about the future of the MWC. I realize when/if it gets to that point the SDSU crowd won't care much because you won't be in the MWC any longer, but you should care because 6 schools left without a viable conference is bad for college sports in general. Nobody should be wishing for that. A 6-school MWC shouldn't find too much trouble finding schools to add, but the ugly reality is that we're running out of those schools and also running out of landing places for those who would be left. The WAC is on life support now and in serious danger of ceasing to exist. I would be pretty sad to see that conference fall apart, even though it's in our rear view mirror now and even further in SDSU's rear view mirror. *Maybe* I should care about the MW after SDSU (gods-willing) leaves. But I don't. |
|
|
|
Post by sdmotohead on Jul 24, 2024 10:45:59 GMT -8
I'm fully aware of SJSU's standing in the Bay Area. And nobody on this board, besides you, gives a flying fart about New Mexico St! It's more about caring about the future of the MWC. I realize when/if it gets to that point the SDSU crowd won't care much because you won't be in the MWC any longer, but you should care because 6 schools left without a viable conference is bad for college sports in general. Nobody should be wishing for that. A 6-school MWC shouldn't find too much trouble finding schools to add, but the ugly reality is that we're running out of those schools and also running out of landing places for those who would be left. The WAC is on life support now and in serious danger of ceasing to exist. I would be pretty sad to see that conference fall apart, even though it's in our rear view mirror now and even further in SDSU's rear view mirror. I'm pretty sure Utah, TCU and BYU don't care about the MWC... |
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Jul 24, 2024 13:18:48 GMT -8
Maybe I care more than I should. To me, it's easy not to care about your old home after you've moved into a shiny new one in a better neighborhood. But there's still that part of me that says it was my home that I grew up in and I don't want to see it go neglected. Even though that home is a part of my distant past it is still a part of my history and heritage and I wish it nothing but the best.
Conferences being pulled apart isn't good for college sports IMO. A lot of what's happening these days isn't good for college sports and I for one think it's a shame. A lot of traditional rivalries and traditional bowl game matchups have been destroyed in the interest of the P4 and the almighty dollar. The PAC-12 was a conference of legends. It's been around for what, 60-70 years? The WAC has been around for roughly the same amount of time - just a few years less than the PAC. It's still alive and kicking but just barely. If the rumors I'm hearing pan out, the WAC is going to be kaput in a couple years. That would be just sad. The WAC has been incredibly resilient, having its heart ripped out multiple times over the course of its history and always managing to find a way to pull itself back up by the bootstraps and survive. This time though I think they've run out of schools to rebuild with, assuming the rumors of defections I'm hearing are true. I see no viable path to them rebuilding this time. Like it or not, the WAC is a big part of SDSU's history. It was an exciting upgrade when SDSU got to move to the WAC from the PCAA as it was then called. The WAC is a big part of my alma mater's history as well, but it was the beginning of the end when the conference dropped football. Even with that, the conference did quite well as a non-football conference for a lot of years, and is still hanging in there. For now. To that end, I don't "care" about the WAC in that I don't follow any of the teams that are still in it, but I care about it in that it's a long time college sports institution that I don't want to see fall apart. I hope that makes sense.
Likewise, the PAC has been around forever. There were a lot of traditional rivalries in that conference. For many years the Rose Bowl was PAC-12 vs Big 10. It was New Year's Day tradition. That is of course no more.
Many other things in college sports have been ruined by the greed. Texas vs A&M for example - A&M left for the SEC and then for a long time those two long time rivals were pretty much not on speaking terms. Now they're going to be conference mates again so the rivalry will be restored, but from what I understand A&M isn't particularly thrilled about it. Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State - the Bedlam Game was one of the more fun rival games to watch on TV, but now that is destroyed and those two schools have no intention of playing each other. Those are just a couple examples of many.
The PAC is now in a situation where if it doesn't find 6 schools and fast, it is going to cease to exist. Even if it does find enough schools to continue, it will be a mere shell of what it once was. Time will tell if what it reinvents itself as will be an upgrade over the MWC or not.
I know I'm rambling here but it's something I'm passionate about. I really hated to see the PAC-12 implode like it did. I couldn't give 2 rips about any of the schools in the PAC but watching its implosion was disturbing. The same is happening to the WAC and it could happen to the MWC, and I just think it all makes for a sad day in collegiate athletics. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by docmm on Jul 24, 2024 13:49:18 GMT -8
The MWC hasn't given a rat's ass about us for decades. But of course they're more than happy to take our MM credits and share them equally with all the other grossly under-performing schools and then screw us on every other decision that affects us. When and if we leave this garbage conference, it can completely cease to exist and take all the leftover schools with it. No tears will EVER be shed.
You used this metaphor to make it sound reasonable:
"Maybe I care more than I should. To me, it's easy not to care about your old home after you've moved into a shiny new one in a better neighborhood. But there's still that part of me that says it was my home that I grew up in and I don't want to see it go neglected. Even though that home is a part of my distant past it is still a part of my history and heritage and I wish it nothing but the best."
Maybe that's true if the old home of yours was a place where you were safe and happy but the MWC was more like growing up in a Charles Dickens orphanage. F**k'em.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jul 24, 2024 14:56:54 GMT -8
This is all about math. Gloria will go out and get bids for the MW with the current 12 and then the 12 with certain acquisitions. Teresa Gould will go out and get a bid for the P2 and then certain combinations of teams to get to 8, 10, 12, etc teams. The math will be the math. Will the increase from dumping the bottom of the MW worth the increased media revenue to justify the exit fees. You are correct about it being math… but the exit fees for six teams will be less than four teams… six teams can block everything and basically $#!+ down the MWC… expect six teams with exit fees less than half of the current numbers… |
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jul 24, 2024 14:57:51 GMT -8
I'd take Nevada and San Jose before Tulane and Memphis. Mainly for geographic reasons, but other reasons as well. IMO the new PAC should aim to be more than just an "Enhanced-MWC"; it should aspire to attract top-tier institutions in both academics and athletics. Including UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, and potentially Rice in Houston would be a strong foundation, in addition to 5-6 MW schools. Limiting expansion to the west with 12 schools is a solid starting point, providing stability for future realignment, especially if the Grant of Rights ensures each school's media value falls within the $10MM-$15MM range. Ok… but FSU and BSU are out then… terrible academics |
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Jul 24, 2024 15:06:12 GMT -8
IMO the new PAC should aim to be more than just an "Enhanced-MWC"; it should aspire to attract top-tier institutions in both academics and athletics. Including UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, and potentially Rice in Houston would be a strong foundation, in addition to 5-6 MW schools. Limiting expansion to the west with 12 schools is a solid starting point, providing stability for future realignment, especially if the Grant of Rights ensures each school's media value falls within the $10MM-$15MM range. Ok… but FSU and BSU are out then… terrible academics There needs to be a commitment from them to improve in that area. Boise State is a horrible school academically. |
|
|
|
Post by docmm on Jul 24, 2024 15:16:46 GMT -8
Ok… but FSU and BSU are out then… terrible academics There needs to be a commitment from them to improve in that area. Boise State is a horrible school academically. The way the college conference landscape has changed , I'm not sure schools care any longer about who fits whose academics. SMU has never been a bastion of intellectual thought but even snooty old Stanford and Cal have no problem wallowing in the ACC $-Mud with them. They're all hypocrites and snobs. |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jul 24, 2024 15:20:52 GMT -8
Maybe I care more than I should. To me, it's easy not to care about your old home after you've moved into a shiny new one in a better neighborhood. But there's still that part of me that says it was my home that I grew up in and I don't want to see it go neglected. Even though that home is a part of my distant past it is still a part of my history and heritage and I wish it nothing but the best. Conferences being pulled apart isn't good for college sports IMO. A lot of what's happening these days isn't good for college sports and I for one think it's a shame. A lot of traditional rivalries and traditional bowl game matchups have been destroyed in the interest of the P4 and the almighty dollar. The PAC-12 was a conference of legends. It's been around for what, 60-70 years? The WAC has been around for roughly the same amount of time - just a few years less than the PAC. It's still alive and kicking but just barely. If the rumors I'm hearing pan out, the WAC is going to be kaput in a couple years. That would be just sad. The WAC has been incredibly resilient, having its heart ripped out multiple times over the course of its history and always managing to find a way to pull itself back up by the bootstraps and survive. This time though I think they've run out of schools to rebuild with, assuming the rumors of defections I'm hearing are true. I see no viable path to them rebuilding this time. Like it or not, the WAC is a big part of SDSU's history. It was an exciting upgrade when SDSU got to move to the WAC from the PCAA as it was then called. The WAC is a big part of my alma mater's history as well, but it was the beginning of the end when the conference dropped football. Even with that, the conference did quite well as a non-football conference for a lot of years, and is still hanging in there. For now. To that end, I don't "care" about the WAC in that I don't follow any of the teams that are still in it, but I care about it in that it's a long time college sports institution that I don't want to see fall apart. I hope that makes sense. Likewise, the PAC has been around forever. There were a lot of traditional rivalries in that conference. For many years the Rose Bowl was PAC-12 vs Big 10. It was New Year's Day tradition. That is of course no more. Many other things in college sports have been ruined by the greed. Texas vs A&M for example - A&M left for the SEC and then for a long time those two long time rivals were pretty much not on speaking terms. Now they're going to be conference mates again so the rivalry will be restored, but from what I understand A&M isn't particularly thrilled about it. Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State - the Bedlam Game was one of the more fun rival games to watch on TV, but now that is destroyed and those two schools have no intention of playing each other. Those are just a couple examples of many. The PAC is now in a situation where if it doesn't find 6 schools and fast, it is going to cease to exist. Even if it does find enough schools to continue, it will be a mere shell of what it once was. Time will tell if what it reinvents itself as will be an upgrade over the MWC or not. I know I'm rambling here but it's something I'm passionate about. I really hated to see the PAC-12 implode like it did. I couldn't give 2 rips about any of the schools in the PAC but watching its implosion was disturbing. The same is happening to the WAC and it could happen to the MWC, and I just think it all makes for a sad day in collegiate athletics. Just my two cents. I get what you're saying! I've thought a lot about whether I care about past Aztec conference affiliations, like the CCAA (1939–1967), PCAA (1969–1975), WAC (1978–1998), and our current MWC (1999–present). And you know what? I sort of do. I'm curious about how realignment has shaken things up, why schools move, and how it changes the face of competition, especially with the CFP playoffs and NCAA Tournament. I'm not really nostalgic about the old days because I know the only constant is change. The WAC is a shell of its former self, the PCAA & CCAA are essentially the Big West. And while we can't do anything on the board to change future affiliations, we can definitely make a difference by buying tickets, supporting Aztec merch and NIL, and watching TV to drive ratings. Go Aztecs! |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 24, 2024 15:30:14 GMT -8
The MWC hasn't given a rat's ass about us for decades. But of course they're more than happy to take our MM credits and share them equally with all the other grossly under-performing schools and then screw us on every other decision that affects us. When and if we leave this garbage conference, it can completely cease to exist and take all the leftover schools with it. No tears will EVER be shed. You used this metaphor to make it sound reasonable: "Maybe I care more than I should. To me, it's easy not to care about your old home after you've moved into a shiny new one in a better neighborhood. But there's still that part of me that says it was my home that I grew up in and I don't want to see it go neglected. Even though that home is a part of my distant past it is still a part of my history and heritage and I wish it nothing but the best." Maybe that's true if the old home of yours was a place where you were safe and happy but the MWC was more like growing up in a Charles Dickens orphanage. F**k'em.  |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 24, 2024 15:32:26 GMT -8
IMO the new PAC should aim to be more than just an "Enhanced-MWC"; it should aspire to attract top-tier institutions in both academics and athletics. Including UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, and potentially Rice in Houston would be a strong foundation, in addition to 5-6 MW schools. Limiting expansion to the west with 12 schools is a solid starting point, providing stability for future realignment, especially if the Grant of Rights ensures each school's media value falls within the $10MM-$15MM range. Ok… but FSU and BSU are out then… terrible academics One other thing, if the PAC2 think they can lure Calford back that will never happen if Boise and Fresno is in the conference. But, whatever deal we look at with the PAC, it will be short term with better exit terms. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 24, 2024 15:33:24 GMT -8
There needs to be a commitment from them to improve in that area. Boise State is a horrible school academically. The way the college conference landscape has change , I'm not sure schools care any longer about who fits whose academics. SMU has never been a bastion of intellectual thought but even snooty old Stanford and Cal have no problem wallowing in the ACC $-Mud with them. They're all hypocrites and snobs. SMU is not a research university, but it has many esteemed alumni. |
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Jul 24, 2024 16:14:28 GMT -8
College Football is a major Business - decisions are going to be made on what brings them the most Money
The Ivy league is not a driving force in College football and it may have some of the higher educational schools
A new PAC IF it can be formed is primarily IF it can be a worth while money situation for TV / Media and the Conference - TV needs businesses to be buying ads - so do those businesses see it worth while is more important then the educational status of the schools
This is strictly a business deal
What happens between the ACC and ESPN is strictly up to IF ESPN thinks it is worth it to pay the ACC to televise their games and or at what price
CAL and Stanford have the Money situation - with the ego factor tossed in - although the the cost to travel could become a factor and wear and tear on the athletes
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecjeff on Jul 24, 2024 21:28:36 GMT -8
I think the Pac-2 will most likely invite the "top 9" from the Mountain West. Those schools will "in turn" vote to dissolve the MWC... thereby eliminating:
1. The need for the Pac-2 to invite all 12 MWC schools.
2. The need for the Pac-2 to pay poaching fees to the MWC.
3. The need for the 9 departing MWC schools to pay any exit fees to their old conference.
They would then most likely add UTSA to make it a 12 team league. Question is, which "3" schools would be left behind? Wyoming? Utah State? Nevada? San Jose State? New Mexico? Hawaii?
|
|
|
|
Post by docmm on Jul 24, 2024 21:46:37 GMT -8
I think the Pac-2 will most likely invite the "top 9" from the Mountain West. Those schools will "in turn" vote to dissolve the MWC... thereby eliminating: 1. The need for the Pac-2 to invite all 12 MWC schools. 2. The need for the Pac-2 to pay poaching fees to the MWC. 3. The need for the 9 departing MWC schools to pay any exit fees to their old conference. They would then most likely add UTSA to make it a 12 team league. Question is, which "3" schools would be left behind? Wyoming? Utah State? Nevada? San Jose State? New Mexico? Hawaii? I vote for Wyoming, Utah State and San Jose State. |
|
|
|
Post by rockymountainaztec on Jul 25, 2024 6:45:35 GMT -8
It really sucks that SDSU now needs to wait 2 years to MAYBE get into a slightly better conference. Seems like the Big12 is now whale hunting and we may have burned this bridge anyway by preferring the Pac12 before the collapse. Still lamenting what could have been..
|
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 25, 2024 7:34:24 GMT -8
College Football is a major Business - decisions are going to be made on what brings them the most Money The Ivy league is not a driving force in College football and it may have some of the higher educational schools A new PAC IF it can be formed is primarily IF it can be a worth while money situation for TV / Media and the Conference - TV needs businesses to be buying ads - so do those businesses see it worth while is more important then the educational status of the schools This is strictly a business deal What happens between the ACC and ESPN is strictly up to IF ESPN thinks it is worth it to pay the ACC to televise their games and or at what price CAL and Stanford have the Money situation - with the ego factor tossed in - although the the cost to travel could become a factor and wear and tear on the athletes Decisions are being made by network media execs. They will want markets over specific institutions. Once most of the rivalries are destroyed the netwok might start asking questions like: 1. Do we really need more than one team in Alabama? 2. Is Nebraska a good enough market? 3. Why multiple schools in Indiana (or any other small population states)? I will take a while for us to get to that point, but the B1G presidents wanted Calford and FOX said "NO!!!!" |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Jul 25, 2024 7:35:18 GMT -8
It really sucks that SDSU now needs to wait 2 years to MAYBE get into a slightly better conference. Seems like the Big12 is now whale hunting and we may have burned this bridge anyway by preferring the Pac12 before the collapse. Still lamenting what could have been.. Don't think Yomark is going to hold a grudge. If adding SDSU adds to the value of the conference, he will add them. |
|
