Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2011 22:03:03 GMT -8
Memphis really makes no sense at all. No, and Robert's explanation fails to persuade to the contrary. The issue isn't Memphis versus SDSU or UNLV. We're already members of the MWC. The issue is Memphis versus other expansion possibilities and Robert hasn't compared Memphis to any except Utah State, which is universally opposed. So the issue isn't even Memphis versus USU, it's Memphis versus several Texas schools. Granted, Memphis has it all over them when it comes to basketball. However, they have it all over Memphis in football recruiting potential and they certainly have it all over Memphis in travel expenses for non-revenue teams. And aronoff is correct. If the Big East goes to 12, which it inevitably will if it decides as it apparently has to continue to be a football conference, because of the Big East's basketball centricity and because of Memphis' location, it is a no-brainer for them. So that's another reason his advocacy of the Paper Tigers is illogical.
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Jan 17, 2011 22:41:30 GMT -8
Memphis? If it is between Memphis, Utah State or Tulsa for the last spot, which one makes the most sense? Memphis would fit fine in that division and Western schools such as Hawaii, Fresno, SDSU and Vegas would hardly ever have to travel to play them. Memphis brings the Liberty Bowl vs the SEC and Fed Ex sponsorship. Memphis is a cool city and blows away Logan Utah! Memphis is the smart pick. Let's hope our MWC presidents use their brains. Losing Memphis would hurt CUSA big time! Tulsa if those 3 teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2011 10:05:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jan 18, 2011 10:26:09 GMT -8
What's the down side to pissing off Comcast? This tv deal sucks anyways, give them a reason to break it off. No to UTEP or USU. Stay at ten or add the Cusa schools from Texas. I completely agree. Interesting, just as with San Diego, despite TCU's success, The Mtn. has never been part of the cable sports package in DFW. That's the main reason folks on the MWC board think SMU wouldn't be interested in leaving CUSA. Of course getting out from under Comcast would presumably solve that problem. Anyway, I continue to think the best thing the MWC could do is dissolve its relationship with Comcast and sell or lease The Mtn. to ESPN as part of its family of networks. Even assuming the MWC would have to play a midweek game every week and assuming also there would be a loss in revenue, it would be worth it in the long run. SGF, I think you're a smart guy... but how would getting less money be a good thing??
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jan 18, 2011 10:58:48 GMT -8
Utah state is a huge mistake, if we are tying our ship to them for a few grand in potential tv money we are making a monumental error. Utah state will never be a big program in that location. If we add them for a couple years to maximize money, to further separate ourselves from the mountain schools and then breakoff with the western 6, cal poly and san jose state, then that's fine.
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Jan 18, 2011 11:02:44 GMT -8
Utah state is a huge mistake, if we are tying our ship to them for a few grand in potential tv money we are making a monumental error. Utah state will never be a big program in that location. If we add them for a couple years to maximize money, to further separate ourselves from the mountain schools and then breakoff with the western 6, cal poly and san jose state, then that's fine. At least we will not have BYU and Utah voting for them. If we expand it should be 2 and they should be Houston and SMU. Personally I'm OK with the 10 we have.Let's do better marketing, get a better TV deal, and kick some ass on the field and court!
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jan 18, 2011 11:09:54 GMT -8
Utah state is a huge mistake, if we are tying our ship to them for a few grand in potential tv money we are making a monumental error. Utah state will never be a big program in that location. If we add them for a couple years to maximize money, to further separate ourselves from the mountain schools and then breakoff with the western 6, cal poly and san jose state, then that's fine. At least we will not have BYU and Utah voting for them. If we expand it should be 2 and they should be Houston and SMU. Personally I'm OK with the 10 we have.Let's do better marketing, get a better TV deal, and kick some ass on the field and court! I agree, to me the only options are stay at 10 or point at something shiny and run away from WYO and most of the mountain schools
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Jan 18, 2011 11:12:32 GMT -8
prefer schools in Texas, Tulsa, and CA - let the WAC have the high elevation mountain schools- Ustate, WYO, C-State, even NM- Time for control of the conference to be in CA, LV, Texas
|
|
|
Post by dbauer on Jan 18, 2011 11:15:56 GMT -8
My guess is Comcast is putting the carrot in front of the MWC to take USU. They will be stuck with the MTN in Utah with no MWC teams. In other words, the MWC is supposed to bail out Comcast for Comcast's own stupidity. Forget Texas for now so stay at 10 teams. It's time for our presidents to take a stand and tell Comcast to go to hell. Meanwhile get someone who knows how to negotiate deals other than that small time Hair Thompson. Why the hell don't we have the MTN on cable in California? California/Nevada is where the TV numbers will be in 2012. Great points. Yeah, no TV in Utah could hurt. Whats the point of the MTN now? The glass may be more half full than we think. Comcast owns the Mountain and is about to own NBC (I think the sale was just approved) which also includes USA and a bunch of other nets. Maybe way to cool to think, but potentially we could see marque match-ups that feature the Mountain West aired on NBC or USA...who knows, but the possibility will exist.
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Jan 18, 2011 11:16:10 GMT -8
At least we will not have BYU and Utah voting for them. If we expand it should be 2 and they should be Houston and SMU. Personally I'm OK with the 10 we have.Let's do better marketing, get a better TV deal, and kick some ass on the field and court! I agree, to me the only options are stay at 10 or point at something shiny and run away from WYO and most of the mountain schools I would trade UTEP for Wyoming. You Could have this for the New MWC: WEST Hawaii San Diego State Fresno State UNLV Nevada Boise State EAST Colorado State Air Force New Mexico UTEP Houston SMU The WAC could add Wyoming.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2011 11:23:54 GMT -8
I completely agree. Interesting, just as with San Diego, despite TCU's success, The Mtn. has never been part of the cable sports package in DFW. That's the main reason folks on the MWC board think SMU wouldn't be interested in leaving CUSA. Of course getting out from under Comcast would presumably solve that problem. Anyway, I continue to think the best thing the MWC could do is dissolve its relationship with Comcast and sell or lease The Mtn. to ESPN as part of its family of networks. Even assuming the MWC would have to play a midweek game every week and assuming also there would be a loss in revenue, it would be worth it in the long run. SGF, I think you're a smart guy... but how would getting less money be a good thing?? I probably should have said even assuming there would be a loss of revenue. If The Mtn. was leased or sold to ESPN, ESPN would pimp the heck out of it on its other networks. In contrast, Tim Brando has said on his radio show that CBS doesn't want to lose the SEC (can't afford to is probably more like it) and the SEC doesn't want CBS to publicize any of the competing college sports programming on other CBS affiliates, so if somebody tunes into an SEC game on CBS, there isn't going to be anything there to inform the viewer there might be a better game on The Mtn. That simply is never going to happen and the absence of such free advertising hurts the MWC. Brando works PT for CBS yet he says that. The Mtn. is great. However, Comcast really, really sucks. And JYP, I don't agree the new MWC will just be the old WAC. Yeah we're still going to be in the same conference as the Front Range schools and UNM but without such other deadwood as Rice, Tulsa (hell bound for crap again now that Todd Graham has left) and - dare I say it? - UTEP. And if SMU is added, although the Mustangs were also in the WAC, they were miserable then. Not so now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2011 11:26:56 GMT -8
The glass may be more half full than we think. Comcast owns the Mountain and is about to own NBC (I think the sale was just approved) which also includes USA and a bunch of other nets. Maybe way to cool to think, but potentially we could see marque match-ups that feature the Mountain West aired on NBC or USA...who knows, but the possibility will exist. The possibility will exist just as long as Notre Dame doesn't demand that NBC exclusively pimp the Irish like the SEC demands that CBS totally brown nose them.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jan 18, 2011 11:30:23 GMT -8
I agree, to me the only options are stay at 10 or point at something shiny and run away from WYO and most of the mountain schools I would trade UTEP for Wyoming. You Could have this for the New MWC: WEST Hawaii San Diego State Fresno State UNLV Nevada Boise State EAST Colorado State Air Force New Mexico UTEP Houston SMU The WAC could add Wyoming. I don't see the rest of the mtn schools splitting from each other, so really the only option is continue to be with them (yuck) or start a new conference and leave them all behind --- I vote for the latter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2011 11:33:27 GMT -8
I agree, to me the only options are stay at 10 or point at something shiny and run away from WYO and most of the mountain schools I would trade UTEP for Wyoming. You Could have this for the New MWC: WEST Hawaii San Diego State Fresno State UNLV Nevada Boise State EAST Colorado State Air Force New Mexico UTEP Houston SMU The WAC could add Wyoming. Wyoming will never be kicked out. The only way to distance ourselves from them is to create a whole new conference. If SJSU would get its football house in order, and I think their new coach is doing a really good recruiting job under the circumstances, you take the western six you have and add the Spartans and Montana and you have a pretty good football conference with schools close enough together so as to mitigate travel expenses. (Hawaii excepted, of course.) That would be a conference worth building upon. However, if the MWC now adds USU and UTEP, I agree with you we will be pretty much back little more than the old WAC we left a dozen years ago.
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jan 18, 2011 13:22:35 GMT -8
Wyoming will never be kicked out. The only way to distance ourselves from them is to create a whole new conference. If SJSU would get its football house in order, and I think their new coach is doing a really good recruiting job under the circumstances, you take the western six you have and add the Spartans and Montana and you have a pretty good football conference with schools close enough together so as to mitigate travel expenses. (Hawaii excepted, of course.) That would be a conference worth building upon. However, if the MWC now adds USU and UTEP, I agree with you we will be pretty much back little more than the old WAC we left a dozen years ago. Comcast, USU and the state of Utah makes me sick. If I hurl, it's going to land on Thompson's hair.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jan 18, 2011 13:30:49 GMT -8
I would trade UTEP for Wyoming. You Could have this for the New MWC: WEST Hawaii San Diego State Fresno State UNLV Nevada Boise State EAST Colorado State Air Force New Mexico UTEP Houston SMU The WAC could add Wyoming. Wyoming will never be kicked out. The only way to distance ourselves from them is to create a whole new conference. If SJSU would get its football house in order, and I think their new coach is doing a really good recruiting job under the circumstances, you take the western six you have and add the Spartans and Montana and you have a pretty good football conference with schools close enough together so as to mitigate travel expenses. (Hawaii excepted, of course.) That would be a conference worth building upon. However, if the MWC now adds USU and UTEP, I agree with you we will be pretty much back little more than the old WAC we left a dozen years ago. If Montana can go without montana state, then absolutely, i'm not sure they can though
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jan 18, 2011 13:48:17 GMT -8
Wyoming will never be kicked out. The only way to distance ourselves from them is to create a whole new conference. If SJSU would get its football house in order, and I think their new coach is doing a really good recruiting job under the circumstances, you take the western six you have and add the Spartans and Montana and you have a pretty good football conference with schools close enough together so as to mitigate travel expenses. (Hawaii excepted, of course.) That would be a conference worth building upon. However, if the MWC now adds USU and UTEP, I agree with you we will be pretty much back little more than the old WAC we left a dozen years ago. If Montana can go without montana state, then absolutely, i'm not sure they can though How do you figure Montana? I see them as Wyoming-II.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jan 18, 2011 14:02:33 GMT -8
If Montana can go without montana state, then absolutely, i'm not sure they can though How do you figure Montana? I see them as Wyoming-II. It's still small, but the state is twice as big as Wyoming. Montana shows a commitment to sports. I think the only options of an 8 team conference are montana, cal poly and san jose state as the other 2 teams. I'd be fine with poly stepping up and san jose, but 4 teams in california might be too much. montana or cal poly could step up a division and be competitive almost from day one, i'd be fine with either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2011 14:21:01 GMT -8
How do you figure Montana? I see them as Wyoming-II. It's still small, but the state is twice as big as Wyoming. Montana shows a commitment to sports. I think the only options of an 8 team conference are montana, cal poly and san jose state as the other 2 teams. I'd be fine with poly stepping up and san jose, but 4 teams in california might be too much. montana or cal poly could step up a division and be competitive almost from day one, i'd be fine with either. Missoula is near the Idaho border and only a half-day drive to Boise. It's also within a half day drive of two of Montana's other cities. And Montana's attendance even as a DIAA school has been better than half the schools in the WAC. SJSU is superior to Cal Poly in one way which is undeniable: access to stud HS football players. I love SLO but it's small and isolated and therefore has almost no DIA football talent nearby (though Nick Tenhaeff and Jerome Long are from nearby). It wouldn't matter at all to Fresno St. nor much to SDSU because we could maybe just bus it but for everybody else in the conference, SLO has teeny tiny airport which accommodates nothing more than little puddle jumpers. That's a huge concern too since I think everybody else would have to fly in to Santa Barbara and drive up from there, which IIRC is about an hour and a half.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Jan 18, 2011 16:21:45 GMT -8
tired of the schools with altitude problems for the players and travel that needs long bus ride with plane trip-
|
|