|
|
Post by fanhood on Jun 6, 2010 7:48:49 GMT -8
With expansion rumors in full force, I figured I would address them all (Its Sunday, I have the time) and show how all of them will end with the Aztecs and the MWC in a good position. All expansion scenarios are going to be based on the assumption that the MWC adds Boise State next week.
1. Boise State to the MWC - This is the obvious one, that has many benefits. First and foremost, it looks like Boise State has a solid chance of going undefeated in 2010, if they can get by Va Tech. All of these victories/prestige will ultimately be counted as if they are in the MWC. With TCU returning many players, it is possible that we could have a TCU vs Boise State National Championship game. The only negative is if adding Boise State dilutes the revenue share for each team. I do not think this will happen, but if it does, the short term publicity, and prestige we would gain is worth it. Ultimately, with this move alone, the MWC will be a BCS conference.
2. Rutgers or Pitt or Syracuse to the Big 10 - This discredits the Big East even further. The MWC continues to strengthen. This road leads the MWC in the BCS in 2012.
3. Big 10 adds Mizzou and Nebraska - This dilutes the Big 12. The Big 12 will never add TCU as long as Texas is still in the conference, because UT will not allow it. MWC will then stay in tact.
4. PAC 10 adds Colorado and Texas - This will never happen because UT will not leave Texas A&M. However, if it does, this negates the remote chance that Utah leaves for the Pac 10. Again, the MWC is strong and will be in the BCS by 2012.
5. Pac 10 adds Baylor, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, or any other major combination of the Big 12. This is probably the best scenario for the MWC and the Aztecs. We will have already added Boise State. We then add Kansas and Colorado, or Kansas State if Colorado goes to the Pac 10. We are now even more of a basketball power than before, and we will be a BCS conference in 2012.
6. SEC expands adding Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State. The Big 10 will have already added Mizzou and Nebraska. We then pick the two best remaining Big 12 schools. Again, the MWC is strengthened, and we are in the BCS by 2012.
All scenarios are good for the MWC. We are sitting pretty my friends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Borg on Jun 6, 2010 8:07:22 GMT -8
I think you're right. Who woulda thunk it even 2 months ago, that the MWC could come out of this whole mess smelling like a rose?
I love it. I can't stand that greedy BCS mentality. Let them eat each other up...and we'll end up benefitting.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 6, 2010 8:14:47 GMT -8
I think you're right. Who woulda thunk it even 2 months ago, that the MWC could come out of this whole mess smelling like a rose? I love it. I can't stand that greedy BCS mentality. Let them eat each other up...and we'll end up benefitting. By "we'll" you do mean SDSU right? You wouldn't think about leaving us out in the cold just because we threw a scare into you last season? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Borg on Jun 6, 2010 8:42:10 GMT -8
Watch it dshaw...everything is on the table. BYU is considering jumping to the Big Sky if we get the invite.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 6, 2010 8:46:48 GMT -8
Watch it dshaw...everything is on the table. BYU is considering jumping to the Big Sky if we get the invite. Would you be taking the Las Vegas Bowl with you?  Pretty brazen smack being ran by me considering my team has a bowl record that takes one's breath away.....  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecpaulg on Jun 6, 2010 9:17:19 GMT -8
The one scenario not mentioned is the Pac 10 taking Colorado and Utah and the Big 10 taking Nebraska and Missouri. At that point, BSU would have taken Utah's place in the MWC, but the Big 12 would be down to 9. At that point they'd take TCU. We'd be left with a conference very similar to the MWC when it was created
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 6, 2010 9:26:27 GMT -8
The one scenario not mentioned is the Pac 10 taking Colorado and Utah and the Big 10 taking Nebraska and Missouri. At that point, BSU would have taken Utah's place in the MWC, but the Big 12 would be down to 9. At that point they'd take TCU. We'd be left with a conference very similar to the MWC when it was created Here's an article from the Denver Post advocating CU to the MWC. Of course it makes too much sense to actually happen. www.denverpost.com/kiszla/ci_15236809 |
|
|
|
Post by kpaztec on Jun 6, 2010 10:26:36 GMT -8
Good topic. I was surprised to see the CU to MWC poll showed that % more popular than the Pac 10...Maybe we have more credibility than I thought. So used to defending SDSU and our conference vs. the Pac 10 honks; I guess I don't give the MWC its due!
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jun 6, 2010 10:29:48 GMT -8
The one scenario not mentioned is the Pac 10 taking Colorado and Utah and the Big 10 taking Nebraska and Missouri. At that point, BSU would have taken Utah's place in the MWC, but the Big 12 would be down to 9. At that point they'd take TCU. We'd be left with a conference very similar to the MWC when it was created Here's an article from the Denver Post advocating CU to the MWC. Of course it makes too much sense to actually happen. www.denverpost.com/kiszla/ci_15236809It would make more sense if we have BSU, for CU to join. I just wonder how many Basketball doormats the conference can stand. For Football, adding BSU and a couple more makes sense if they organize it correctly, but Basketball would take a hit for a while. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 6, 2010 10:41:44 GMT -8
Frankly, I had not thought of the possibility of Colorado's joining the MWC. However, when I do consider the idea I kind of like it. Colorado is not so dominant that it would represent an almost yearly L for Aztec football. But it is high enough profile that it would enhance our conference.
I have to think that most CU fans would not, at least initially, be enthusiastic about this idea. On the other hand, this concept does have some positive aspects. Maybe the Buffalo community would warm up after considering all the angles.
Man, there are so many ideas out there that I cannot keep my head from spinning. I hope things get settled down soon. It's not good for schools to be joining and leaving conferences as often as trains depart from Grand Central Station.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by rickdoerr on Jun 6, 2010 11:57:49 GMT -8
The term "all" scares me a bit. Assuming there's some kind of major but nonfatal Big 12 implosion, the remaining schools might want to invite the top 5 MWC schools. We then could be left out.
One of the other assumptions is that there will be 5 megaconferences when the smoke clears, all having access to the BCS. Why would the Big10/11/16, SEC, ACC and BIGPAC want to allow a fifth conference, comprised of teams they've historically wanted to exclude, a share of BCS money? Also, given the 4 super conferences will there be a BCS around as we know it?
A lot of this is very hypothetical, I know. Probability of any of it happening, who knows. Problem is one can never say never.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Jun 6, 2010 12:00:12 GMT -8
If the end result of realignment is 4 super conferences then the MWC is F'ed.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickdoerr on Jun 6, 2010 12:27:40 GMT -8
LAAZTEC, I see youv'e read the Texas rivals site too. I agree with you. If there's four we're out the door.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2010 13:54:15 GMT -8
The term "all" scares me a bit. Assuming there's some kind of major but nonfatal Big 12 implosion, the remaining schools might want to invite the top 5 MWC schools. We then could be left out. IMO, this is all too complicated and speculative to say on the one hand that everything is going to be hunky dory as fanhood has and OTOH, to predict that if a particular scenario occurs, we're going to be screwed as L.A. says. Way too complicated and speculative. |
|
|
|
Post by texasaztec on Jun 6, 2010 14:04:28 GMT -8
In my opinion, there are three main reasons driving conference realignment. They fall in this order of priority:
1. TV Contracts = More $ to top schools. This is the top priority as I see it. With that in mind, there are a few schools that can really drive this: Notre Dame and Texas being the main, and probably only ones with national clout. With Notre Dame sitting around being courted, they are not really driving anything; they are reactionary in this situation. Only Texas holds all the cards, and because of that whatever Texas wants, Texas is going to get. Once they carve their slice of the pie, then the dominoes will fall and the scramble will begin. However, I don't believe Texas will pull the trigger, until they have a pretty strong idea how those dominoes will fall and they will make sure that everything will shake out in their favor. I live in Texas, and like it or not, Longhorn football is a religion here. It is sickening, but it's true.
2. Bowl Money = More $ to schools involved in BCS. With the conference realignment, you know that the major schools involved will try and keep the pie as small as possible. This is not about fair and balanced competition. Whether or not the BCS remains in tact, will be determined by how Texas frames things and manuevers behind the scenes. They do not want the MWC included because of TCU and having to share more of the pie. They spurn TCU like the PAC-10 spurns SDSU - they are afraid of losing recruits.
3. Keeping rivalries intact = More $ to schools with awesome rivalries. This ties in to the bowl scenarios as they want tie ins to bowls that can keep that rivalry alive, i.e. Rose Bowl. The Texas vs. Texas A&M is the real deal rivalry and will not be split up. If my facts are correct, they even have laws on the books here in Texas to prevent those two schools from being in different conferences. All realignment scenarios that are accurate will have Texas and Texas A&M staying together.
There are four kinds of teams involved in the realignment:
1. Super powerful teams with lots of conference and football political clout (Texas, USC, Alabama)
2. Strong football programs with deep history (Nebraska, Colorado, Miami)
3. All the rest that have been in major conferences who have semi-strong programs most years, an occasional great year and a few bad years (Iowa, Pitt, Georgia)
4. All the rest
SDSU falls in the all the rest of course. But, so do the majority of other schools. We are in a pretty good position not because of our deep history of winning, but because we are in a good conference. Whatever happens SDSU is along for the ride. The things we have to offer are:
1. Great, and getting better basketball.
2. Southern California TV market.
Its all about the money. If the power players in this can genuinely ice out the MWC, they will. But they might not be able to because of the political pressure from some in Washington. There are a lot of factors outside of the MWC's control, but I'm hopeful that our conference has enough to squeeze into the BCS. However, when all the dust settles, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the power conferences/schools rewrite the rules in the middle of all of this and keep the MWC out of the luctrative bowls.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 6, 2010 14:15:02 GMT -8
Solid post Texas - welcome to the board.
|
|
|
|
Post by texasaztec on Jun 6, 2010 14:18:30 GMT -8
Morphed over from AztecTalk. Glad to be here!
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecpaulg on Jun 6, 2010 14:21:11 GMT -8
If the end result of realignment is 4 super conferences then the MWC is F'ed. True, but the members of the conference might not be ... most "projections" about what the 16 team conferences have State being included in the Pac - 16. |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jun 6, 2010 14:53:14 GMT -8
Yah, you still need teams to compete against and generate your Goddy Records. Having 4 super conferences would be nfl junior and nfl junior will fail. Wait when OU is 8-4 every year, you can bet there will be consequences.
The Yankees need the Oriols and the AL West to get to to 90 wins. JMO.
|
|
choop
Bench Warmer
Posts: 52
|
Post by choop on Jun 6, 2010 18:31:09 GMT -8
I don't think the MWC comes thru this unscathed. Other conferences are going to try to survive. What stops the Big 12 from offering 4 schools within this month? Anything can happen. Its far to early to think the MWC is in the clear.
With the PAC-10 giving approval for the conference to expand by 2 to 6 teams as they did today, the Big-10 is probably going to jump right in to expand to the same size. If either go to 16 teams, the SEC will probably follow. That means the ACC will be hot on their tails. The Big East, Big 12 and MWC have the most to lose if these 4 conferences go to 16 teams. That means the 4 conferences would have to pick up 19 teams. They aren't looking for any team, they're looking for the best teams. If you look at the Big East, MWC and Big-12, BYU, Utah and TCU would easily rank in the top 19 teams of those conferences. And don't overlook the possibility of the Big-12 trying to survice by picking up some teams.
If the targeted format is 16 teams for those big schools, its almost a guarantee that the MWC will lose some one at some time. Probably before next June and maybe earlier.
|
|
