|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 4, 2010 21:26:01 GMT -8
I dunno but I'm not thrillied about the future of aztec football being decided(unless favorably) before a game is played this year. I don't consider a reconstituted WAC with limited BCS access a palatable financial alternative for the program. But I'll get in, sit down, shut up, and await events. I'm hoping when the smoke settles that we have a healthy and strong MWC still in place with maybe a couple of attractive additions. Don't we all! Obviously, not all the rumors can be correct. Quite possibly NONE are correct. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by oc74aztec on Jun 4, 2010 21:52:46 GMT -8
My biggest concern in reading the various articles is that NONE ever mention the MWC becoming a AQ conference. In fact, they talk of Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and baylor of having to join a non-AQ conference if they're left out of the Pac10, Big10 and SEC grabs.
Still no guarantees that MWC becomes an AQ conference after the dust settles; and that's unsettling.
|
|
choop
Bench Warmer
Posts: 52
|
Post by choop on Jun 5, 2010 6:37:45 GMT -8
My major concern, too. Just when we had AQ within our grasp, the game changes.
In reference to the comment that all rumors could be wrong, I wish that were the case but seriously doubt it. These guys are all liars, thats the only truth. Did you see the article about the Big-10 commish saying no moves were happening soon, and then his e-mail being made public to a school president saying they are fast tracking expansion plans?
Piles of money are behind all this, and when there are piles of money to be made, something will happen. My guess, within one year a dozen schools have announced new homes.
Interesting article from a Seattle paper suggests;
"Would Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State along with Boise State, Houston, and Nevada join the Mountain West?"
It would be a helluva basketball conference. Chalk it up to another guess among the 2,000 others as to how this will all pan out.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 5, 2010 6:47:38 GMT -8
I'm not sold on Houston, they've had a nice couple of years, but I'm not sure if they are going to keep it up; UNR is a small conference team - they are where they belong. Let all the teams go on the TCU/Boise State timeline: earn it with exemplary performance for a number of years. If the big 12 falls apart and Kansas is availaible and iowa state and baylor are a package deal then great, but Iowa State and baylor by themselves are c-usa teams. 10 or 14 would seem to be the only reasonable expansion plans right now, not 12 or 16.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 9:22:25 GMT -8
It could happen and we would have no one to blame but ourselves for wasting all these many years. +1,000. I highly doubt it would happen, however, if only for the same reason the original Gang of Five asked us to join them in the first place: # of potential TV viewers. Same for UNLV. Not just that but I think there's a scenario under which neither Kansas school would join any of us anyway. The scuttlebutt is Kansas hasn't been in the to-the Big Ten discussion only because there's a belief the state legislature won't let the Jayhawks leave the Big 12 without taking KSU with them. Fact is, the Big Ten will never take KSU so if the state legislature is actually thinking that way, they aren't helping KSU, they're simply hurting KU. If they would pull their head out and realize that and pass a resolution or whatever dispelling the scuttlebutt, I think the Big Ten will offer KU. If not and the SEC strikes the ACC after Big Ten expansion as everyone expects, if both Kansas schools are available, the ACC could conceivably offer both. Of course, that might be a moot point if the MWC was to act first. As an aside, I find this stuff fascinating (obviously), particularly since there is so much strategy as to not only how to act, but when in order to subvert the actions of potential competitors. Therefore, I'm really, really, really glad that the conference is mainly run by people with a clue like the administrators of Utah and BYU as opposed to the bumbling fools who have run SDSU's athletic department since the conference was created.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 9:35:12 GMT -8
I'm not sold on Houston, they've had a nice couple of years, but I'm not sure if they are going to keep it up; UNR is a small conference team - they are where they belong. Let all the teams go on the TCU/Boise State timeline: earn it with exemplary performance for a number of years. If the big 12 falls apart and Kansas is availaible and iowa state and baylor are a package deal then great, but Iowa State and baylor by themselves are c-usa teams. 10 or 14 would seem to be the only reasonable expansion plans right now, not 12 or 16. UNR: If they were added, it would be an excuse for me to fly up to Sacto every other year and drag one of my best friends to an Aztecs game with me; still, they're a fraud (7-1 in the lousy WAC, 1-4 OOC in 2009). Houston: I think if 16-school conferences are going to happen, the MWC could be in a perfect position regarding the Cougars. The MWC will be at 10 with Boise coming in and if the Big 12 falls apart, the conference can then also add KU and KSU if both are available to go to 12 in 2012. Then the MWC just sits tight to see how UH does. I think if they can keep Kevin Sumlin, they're going to continue to progress. However, if they lose him like they lost Art Briles, you can only strike paydirt so many times in a row. And consider this. Last year in a 10-win, fifth consecutive bowl season, UH barely averaged 25K per game. A fifth such season and SDSU would be averaging close to double that. Fresno: See Houston. Once Boise leaves the WAC there will be no excuse for the Bulldogs not to dominate that POS conference in the same manner. Assuming they do, it will be a no-brainer to add them. If they don't, not so much. SMU: I actually think with June Jones on board they may end up being a better choice than Houston. Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jun 5, 2010 9:39:52 GMT -8
I think the one thing that scares me a bit about all of the BIG 12 leftovers/MWC stuff is the gang of five, including TCU, getting together with UK, KSU etc and forming a new big 12 and jettisoning the likes of SDSU, UNLV, UNM. If the BIG 12 can cut some of their partners loose why can't the MWC? I don't think this would happen. SDSU isn't going anywhere. Exchange the San Diego (and surrounding cities) TV market for Ames Iowa? SDSU isn't going anywhere and I think the MWC will come out of all this smelling like a rose. We are at the right place at the right time IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jun 5, 2010 9:42:39 GMT -8
My biggest concern in reading the various articles is that NONE ever mention the MWC becoming a AQ conference. In fact, they talk of Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and baylor of having to join a non-AQ conference if they're left out of the Pac10, Big10 and SEC grabs. Still no guarantees that MWC becomes an AQ conference after the dust settles; and that's unsettling. The articles on CBS Sportsline done by Dodd mention that the MWC will be an AQ by 2014 once Boise State is added and even say the MWC will be granted "temporary BCS status" in both 2012 and 2013.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jun 5, 2010 9:45:16 GMT -8
My major concern, too. Just when we had AQ within our grasp, the game changes. In reference to the comment that all rumors could be wrong, I wish that were the case but seriously doubt it. These guys are all liars, thats the only truth. Did you see the article about the Big-10 commish saying no moves were happening soon, and then his e-mail being made public to a school president saying they are fast tracking expansion plans? Piles of money are behind all this, and when there are piles of money to be made, something will happen. My guess, within one year a dozen schools have announced new homes. Interesting article from a Seattle paper suggests; "Would Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State along with Boise State, Houston, and Nevada join the Mountain West?" It would be a helluva basketball conference. Chalk it up to another guess among the 2,000 others as to how this will all pan out. Actually the question to ask is would the MWC want Baylor, Iowa State, or Nevada?...NO. It is Baylor and Iowa State that are in grip mode right now not SDSU.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jun 5, 2010 9:47:06 GMT -8
It could happen and we would have no one to blame but ourselves for wasting all these many years. +1,000. I highly doubt it would happen, however, if only for the same reason the original Gang of Five asked us to join them in the first place: # of potential TV viewers. Same for UNLV. Not just that but I think there's a scenario under which neither Kansas school would join any of us anyway. The scuttlebutt is Kansas hasn't been in the to-the Big Ten discussion only because there's a belief the state legislature won't let the Jayhawks leave the Big 12 without taking KSU with them. Fact is, the Big Ten will never take KSU so if the state legislature is actually thinking that way, they aren't helping KSU, they're simply hurting KU. If they would pull their head out and realize that and pass a resolution or whatever dispelling the scuttlebutt, I think the Big Ten will offer KU. If not and the SEC strikes the ACC after Big Ten expansion as everyone expects, if both Kansas schools are available, the ACC could conceivably offer both. Of course, that might be a moot point if the MWC was to act first. As an aside, I find this stuff fascinating (obviously), particularly since there is so much strategy as to not only how to act, but when in order to subvert the actions of potential competitors. Therefore, I'm really, really, really glad that the conference is mainly run by people with a clue like the administrators of Utah and BYU as opposed to the bumbling fools who have run SDSU's athletic department since the conference was created. Exactly, which is why both KU and KSU will end up in the MWC...IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 5, 2010 9:52:06 GMT -8
I'm not sold on Houston, they've had a nice couple of years, but I'm not sure if they are going to keep it up; UNR is a small conference team - they are where they belong. Let all the teams go on the TCU/Boise State timeline: earn it with exemplary performance for a number of years. If the big 12 falls apart and Kansas is availaible and iowa state and baylor are a package deal then great, but Iowa State and baylor by themselves are c-usa teams. 10 or 14 would seem to be the only reasonable expansion plans right now, not 12 or 16. UNR: If they were added, it would be an excuse for me to fly up to Sacto every other year and drag one of my best friends to an Aztecs game with me; still, they're a fraud (7-1 in the lousy WAC, 1-4 OOC in 2009). Houston: I think if 16-school conferences are going to happen, the MWC could be in a perfect position regarding the Cougars. The MWC will be at 10 with Boise coming in and if the Big 12 falls apart, the conference can then also add KU and KSU if both are available to go to 12 in 2012. Then the MWC just sits tight to see how UH does. I think if they can keep Kevin Sumlin, they're going to continue to progress. However, if they lose him like they lost Art Briles, you can only strike paydirt so many times in a row. And consider this. Last year in a 10-win, fifth consecutive bowl season, UH barely averaged 25K per game. A fifth such season and SDSU would be averaging close to double that. Fresno: See Houston. Once Boise leaves the WAC there will be no excuse for the Bulldogs not to dominate that POS conference in the same manner. Assuming they do, it will be a no-brainer to add them. If they don't, not so much. SMU: I actually think with June Jones on board they may end up being a better choice than Houston. Time will tell. This is Game Theory with something that I enjoy more than anything, college football, so yeah, it's super exciting and intersting. i find all 4 still underwhelming, and think we let it playout with those schools like the MWC did with TCU and Boise. The MWC has a chance to sell itself this week and besides strong showing on the field and court the last few years, it has a chance to sell unity, solidarity and permanence. The possible orphans will surely be more interested in what the MWC does and how it acts - look at the disorder that was the Big12 meetings with people scurrying out of meetings, giving choice quotes on tarmacs, postponing and canceling press conferences, the biggest dog in the land not attending the presser, presumably delivering ultimatums, etc. Part of this mess will be delivering actions from strength, the MWC will have that option, come out as one and strong and all the misfits and cast-offs will have to come hat in hand. In short, this is what a decade of strong building has worked towards and once boise is invited (and I read in the idaho paper the legislature had already approved before hand) I say you invite them monday morning, and have them in attendance for any remaining meetings, joint and individual pressers delivering and hammering the same message. When everyone's inertia is veering towards destruction and yours is rock solid, you've already started to win some of the strategic battles.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jun 5, 2010 9:52:12 GMT -8
It could happen and we would have no one to blame but ourselves for wasting all these many years. I'm really, really, really glad that the conference is mainly run by people with a clue like the administrators of Utah and BYU as opposed to the bumbling fools who have run SDSU's athletic department since the conference was created. No truer words have ever been spoken....I would hate to imagine where we would be if the bafoons who have run the SDSU athletic department in the past were in charge. Where do you think we would be if Rick Bay was in charge of this?
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 5, 2010 9:58:50 GMT -8
It is nice to have someone in the conference and at SDSU that has been in the pac meetings, and was the head of the television committee in the new AD. Also, Weber has been there since the start and is quite a bright man, so I'm guessing he has some good pull and has developed a well-rounded understanding of what is at play. Getting Sterk is like flipping someone, although some of his information has clearly been outstripped by how fast this is moving, I think he can give a nice break-down on what has been discussed and the view of the tv partners of the pac10, and since they seem to be making the first power-politics play, it is likely good information to have.
Hair Thompson has always caught a lot of sh__, but I think the trajectory of this conference speaks for itself, he has done a good job of being a carnaval barker (like all conf. commish's really are) and helping build the mwc brand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 11:30:43 GMT -8
It is nice to have someone in the conference and at SDSU that has been in the pac meetings, and was the head of the television committee in the new AD. Also, Weber has been there since the start and is quite a bright man, so I'm guessing he has some good pull and has developed a well-rounded understanding of what is at play. Getting Sterk is like flipping someone, although some of his information has clearly been outstripped by how fast this is moving, I think he can give a nice break-down on what has been discussed and the view of the tv partners of the pac10, and since they seem to be making the first power-politics play, it is likely good information to have. Hair Thompson has always caught a lot of sh__, but I think the trajectory of this conference speaks for itself, he has done a good job of being a carnaval barker (like all conf. commish's really are) and helping build the mwc brand. Boy do I agree on all this. And just think where SDSU was half a dozen years ago. Bay was still screwing up anything he touched that was more difficult than tying his shoes, Weber was paying no attention to athletics and none of us had any confidence in Thompson. Now the Baywatch stench is completely gone, Weber has stepped up to the plate big time and while I'm going to be holding my breath for the next few months about how all this expansion stuff plays out, Thompson looks like he might be the brightest young conference commissioner in the land.
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jun 5, 2010 16:53:56 GMT -8
This is Game Theory with something that I enjoy more than anything, college football, so yeah, it's super exciting and intersting. i find all 4 still underwhelming, and think we let it playout with those schools like the MWC did with TCU and Boise. The MWC has a chance to sell itself this week and besides strong showing on the field and court the last few years, it has a chance to sell unity, solidarity and permanence. The possible orphans will surely be more interested in what the MWC does and how it acts - look at the disorder that was the Big12 meetings with people scurrying out of meetings, giving choice quotes on tarmacs, postponing and canceling press conferences, the biggest dog in the land not attending the presser, presumably delivering ultimatums, etc. Part of this mess will be delivering actions from strength, the MWC will have that option, come out as one and strong and all the misfits and cast-offs will have to come hat in hand. In short, this is what a decade of strong building has worked towards and once boise is invited (and I read in the idaho paper the legislature had already approved before hand) I say you invite them monday morning, and have them in attendance for any remaining meetings, joint and individual pressers delivering and hammering the same message. When everyone's inertia is veering towards destruction and yours is rock solid, you've already started to win some of the strategic battles. Definitely agree with you on the message it would send if the MWC stays together through all of this conference realignment. If we stay intact and add BSU, I think we would be sitting very pretty should KU and KSU be left out in the cold by the destruction of the Big XII. The MWC is proving to be a very competitive conference in FB and Bball; I'm hoping it survives to continue to grow in prestige with hopefully quite a bit of help from the Red & Black.
|
|
choop
Bench Warmer
Posts: 52
|
Post by choop on Jun 6, 2010 18:35:52 GMT -8
All I look at is greed and power. For that reason, I think there is less than a 5% chance that the MWC stands at 9+ Boise State by the end of June 2011. I'm pissed about it, but the future of the MWC is heading toward being the WAC's playmate for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by rickdoerr on Jun 6, 2010 18:51:03 GMT -8
When one reads the cioverage from the major conferences one gets the impression that they are thinking in terms of only 4 megaconferences and we aren't one of them.
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 6, 2010 20:16:34 GMT -8
the big fear to me is if the Pac10 takes 6 from the Big 12, what if the Big12 in order to remain afloat with their automatic qualifier elect to pillage the MWC
BYU, UTAH, Colorado State, and TCU forming a New "Big 10"
this would leave Boise, NM, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming, and Airforce out in the cold.
If i was Don Beebe, that is exactly what i would do, if i had to take 12, I would take Wyoming and and another before taking SDSU.
of course the Big 10 could take Nebraska/and or Missouri/ND
leaving the Big12 with just 4 teams, in which case they take 6 from the MWC , BYU, Utah, CSU, TCU, NM, and Boise keeping their auto qualifier
|
|
|
Post by some_aztec on Jun 6, 2010 20:35:31 GMT -8
the big fear to me is if the Pac10 takes 6 from the Big 12, what if the Big12 in order to remain afloat with their automatic qualifier elect to pillage the MWC BYU, UTAH, Colorado State, and TCU forming a New "Big 10" this would leave Boise, NM, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming, and Airforce out in the cold. If i was Don Beebe, that is exactly what i would do, if i had to take 12, I would take Wyoming and and another before taking SDSU. of course the Big 10 could take Nebraska/and or Missouri/ND leaving the Big12 with just 4 teams, in which case they take 6 from the MWC , BYU, Utah, CSU, TCU, NM, and Boise keeping their auto qualifier That's certainly the "worst case" scenario, and I'm not 100% convinced that if the Big-12 went down to 4 that the Mountain West teams would jump over there. (I speculate that BYU & Utah would see the landscape as them having power in their conference and not in another one...) In my "dream" best case scenario, let's say the rumor is true, and the Big-12 has asked Missouri & Nebraska to commit to the Big-12 by Friday, or leave (for the Big-X) Let's say they decide to leave, thinking an invitation to the Big-X is immanent. So, Texas + 5 friends decide to go to the Pac-16, and Notre Dame sees the writing on the wall, joins the Big-X. At that point, the Big-X people see their midwest rival (Big-12) is gone, and decide against inviting Mizzou/Nebraska to their conference. So, those two schools will not have a conference to play in. In my "best case" scenario, the MWC could add Boise, Nebraska, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas St & Colorado. 'mid-West' Division: Nebraska Mizzou TCU Kansas Kansas St Colorado Colorado St AFA Mountain Division: BYU Utah Wyoming (w/ a game against CSU every season) SDSU UNLV New Mexico Boise
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 6, 2010 20:55:37 GMT -8
the big fear to me is if the Pac10 takes 6 from the Big 12, what if the Big12 in order to remain afloat with their automatic qualifier elect to pillage the MWC BYU, UTAH, Colorado State, and TCU forming a New "Big 10" this would leave Boise, NM, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming, and Airforce out in the cold. If i was Don Beebe, that is exactly what i would do, if i had to take 12, I would take Wyoming and and another before taking SDSU. of course the Big 10 could take Nebraska/and or Missouri/ND leaving the Big12 with just 4 teams, in which case they take 6 from the MWC , BYU, Utah, CSU, TCU, NM, and Boise keeping their auto qualifier That's certainly the "worst case" scenario, and I'm not 100% convinced that if the Big-12 went down to 4 that the Mountain West teams would jump over there. (I speculate that BYU & Utah would see the landscape as them having power in their conference and not in another one...) In my "dream" best case scenario, let's say the rumor is true, and the Big-12 has asked Missouri & Nebraska to commit to the Big-12 by Friday, or leave (for the Big-X) Let's say they decide to leave, thinking an invitation to the Big-X is immanent. So, Texas + 5 friends decide to go to the Pac-16, and Notre Dame sees the writing on the wall, joins the Big-X. At that point, the Big-X people see their midwest rival (Big-12) is gone, and decide against inviting Mizzou/Nebraska to their conference. So, those two schools will not have a conference to play in. In my "best case" scenario, the MWC could add Boise, Nebraska, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas St & Colorado. 'mid-West' Division: Nebraska Mizzou TCU Kansas Kansas St Colorado Colorado St AFA Mountain Division: BYU Utah Wyoming (w/ a game against CSU every season) SDSU UNLV New Mexico Boise btw having the Jayhawks would be awesome for MWC basketball.
|
|