B
Blanket
Posts: 369
Dec 10, 2010 11:12pm
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Dec 10, 2010 11:29pm
Looks like the WAC is about to die
goosebumps
Posts: 1,058
Dec 10, 2010 11:54pm
I thought this news broke like 3 weeks ago or so, at least the football going to the Mountain West.
E
enigmaax
Posts: 4,511
Dec 11, 2010 1:35am
jordo212000;595892 wrote:Looks like the WAC is about to die
But.....they are bringing in those Texas schools...
Tobias Fünke
Posts: 2,387
Dec 11, 2010 2:01am
The WAC will be on Sun Belt level horribleness for the next decade or so. Just pitiful.
The MWC has taken what is good with the WAC and the remnants of the MWC and formed a conference on par with the Big East. Hawaii proved this year they can have success without June Jones.
If I'm the MWC I look to add two teams and bump to twelve. Perhaps Houston and SMU?
West Division
Boise State
Fresno State
Hawaii
Nevada
San Diego State
UNLV
Mountain Division
Air Force
Colorado State
Houston
New Mexico
SMU
Wyoming
The MWC has taken what is good with the WAC and the remnants of the MWC and formed a conference on par with the Big East. Hawaii proved this year they can have success without June Jones.
If I'm the MWC I look to add two teams and bump to twelve. Perhaps Houston and SMU?
West Division
Boise State
Fresno State
Hawaii
Nevada
San Diego State
UNLV
Mountain Division
Air Force
Colorado State
Houston
New Mexico
SMU
Wyoming
S
Sonofanump
Dec 11, 2010 8:41am
Still second level, could have been respectable with Utah and TCU.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Dec 11, 2010 9:17am
Sonofanump;596045 wrote:Still second level, could have been respectable with Utah and TCU.
Much agreed!
oberhaus
Posts: 868
Dec 11, 2010 11:10am
I dont understand why BYU thinks they "had" to go independent. They would be a great fit in the MWC which is where they are currently right? But it doesnt matter what the MWC does, they wont be granted an AQ status ever.
Sent from my DROIDX
Sent from my DROIDX
E
enigmaax
Posts: 4,511
Dec 11, 2010 11:46am
oberhaus;596118 wrote:I dont understand why BYU thinks they "had" to go independent. They would be a great fit in the MWC which is where they are currently right? But it doesnt matter what the MWC does, they wont be granted an AQ status ever.
Sent from my DROIDX
Well, a lucrative contract with ESPN for the better part of the next decade and the opportunity to play a national schedule might have been small factors.
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Dec 11, 2010 12:48pm
enigmaax;596154 wrote:Well, a lucrative contract with ESPN for the better part of the next decade and the opportunity to play a national schedule might have been small factors.
ND's BCS qualifications won't apply to BYU as an independent, but it does bring up an argument for them to be given the same requirements. I don't know if BYU has the pull to squawk loudly enough for it to be heard in time for 2013 and the new look at things, but I would imagine that if others would go IND. also that some sort of adjustment would have to be done.
E
enigmaax
Posts: 4,511
Dec 11, 2010 1:03pm
ytownfootball;596209 wrote:ND's BCS qualifications won't apply to BYU as an independent, but it does bring up an argument for them to be given the same requirements. I don't know if BYU has the pull to squawk loudly enough for it to be heard in time for 2013 and the new look at things, but I would imagine that if others would go IND. also that some sort of adjustment would have to be done.
I presume they still fall under the autoqualifying guidelines for teams in a non-AQ conference. I know the wording seems to specify non-AQs from the specific conferences, but I don't think they'd have jumped without knowing what they're facing. That, or, at the very least they assume that by playing a national schedule any BYU team that runs the table isn't going to have to make the same case that a MWC champion has to try and make - because they'd have (by the nature of their schedule) truly proven themselves.
darbypitcher22
Posts: 8,000
Dec 11, 2010 1:57pm
The WAC will die, I believe, in 3 or 4 years. Just won't be the revenue base
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
Dec 11, 2010 2:00pm
goosebumps;595906 wrote:I thought this news broke like 3 weeks ago or so, at least the football going to the Mountain West.
They had simply entered into negotiations a month ago. They hashed out the details and officially pulled the trigger this week.
goosebumps
Posts: 1,058
Dec 11, 2010 2:44pm
ts1227;596268 wrote:They had simply entered into negotiations a month ago. They hashed out the details and officially pulled the trigger this week.
Gotcha, thanks for the response.
Whoever said the MWC would be on par with the BE is high lol. They lost the only three teams who were ever worth a damn in the conference.
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Dec 11, 2010 6:30pm
Perhaps if we're only discussing money - obviously BYU/Utah have cash and TCU can as long as they win - but I'm not sure those programs are currently hugely better than the 4 incoming teams. Hawaii, Boise and Nevada finished ranked in the BCS and Fresno wasn't far behind (beat Cincinnati and Illinois this year).
A
AcesinCalifornia
Posts: 67
Dec 12, 2010 1:23pm
I know this is on the football forum, but I am interested in the basketball move also as my university is in the Big West. A bit unexpected out of the BW, as it is a bus league (all California teams, and almost all in southern CA) and this will increase travel costs substantially. However, I suppose Hawaii brings a bit more exposure to the conference (even though most of Hawaii's sports programs are not that great).
As for football, the MWC is clearly better for the defecting WAC teams, as teams like San Diego State and Wyoming are generally better than New Mexico State and San Jose State. However, the MWC has no legitimacy as a prospective BCS conference without at least two of the three departing teams remaining/returning, which isn't happening.
As for football, the MWC is clearly better for the defecting WAC teams, as teams like San Diego State and Wyoming are generally better than New Mexico State and San Jose State. However, the MWC has no legitimacy as a prospective BCS conference without at least two of the three departing teams remaining/returning, which isn't happening.
Tobias Fünke
Posts: 2,387
Dec 12, 2010 4:36pm
I will still argue the twelve-team conference I drew up is as good, if not better, than the Big East.
A
AcesinCalifornia
Posts: 67
Dec 12, 2010 5:30pm
Tobias,
I agree, if they can add two good non-BCS programs (Houston I would say is, and SMU is on the way finally) they would have an argument (of if they could get a Big 12 team or two in the future). Another good CUSA school that might fit would be Tulsa, or maybe UTEP (not as good on the field, but good geographically).
I agree, if they can add two good non-BCS programs (Houston I would say is, and SMU is on the way finally) they would have an argument (of if they could get a Big 12 team or two in the future). Another good CUSA school that might fit would be Tulsa, or maybe UTEP (not as good on the field, but good geographically).
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Dec 12, 2010 5:37pm
Mountain West will be solid. Getting Houston and one other school (SMU would be a nice choice) would definitely make it a much better conference than the Big East. At the very least, it is even.
Some around here can't wrap their head around that
Some around here can't wrap their head around that
Tobias Fünke
Posts: 2,387
Dec 12, 2010 6:05pm
Tulsa would be a solid pickup; I forgot about them. UTEP makes sense, but I agree not as a primary target. SMU and Houston give them a big foothold in Dallas and Houston, which is big for television.
How about bumping to fourteen. I oppose it fervidly, but it's neat to think about. I don't think any of the Big XII teams would leave, Kansas and Kansas State need each other, and Kansas wouldn't leave because of the basketball. Missouri doesn't make sense. Texas Tech and Baylor are the teams I could see leaving, but would the State of Texas let them?
If the MWC were to add SMU, Houston, Tulsa, and Baylor/Texas Tech/UTEP, it would be big. That'd put them on par with the ACC's down years.
How about bumping to fourteen. I oppose it fervidly, but it's neat to think about. I don't think any of the Big XII teams would leave, Kansas and Kansas State need each other, and Kansas wouldn't leave because of the basketball. Missouri doesn't make sense. Texas Tech and Baylor are the teams I could see leaving, but would the State of Texas let them?
If the MWC were to add SMU, Houston, Tulsa, and Baylor/Texas Tech/UTEP, it would be big. That'd put them on par with the ACC's down years.
goosebumps
Posts: 1,058
Dec 12, 2010 6:41pm
Why would Texas Tech ever go to the MWC??? Are you forgetting that the PAC 10 would take them?
You're reaching so much. and SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Baylor, and UTEP aren't anywhere close to anyone in the Big East.
You're reaching so much. and SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Baylor, and UTEP aren't anywhere close to anyone in the Big East.
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Dec 12, 2010 9:23pm
goosebumps;598156 wrote: You're reaching so much. and SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Baylor, and UTEP aren't anywhere close to anyone in the Big East.
SMU currently isn't great, but they seem to be on the right track to regaining relevancy.
But Baylor and Tulsa could both play with a few of the bottom dwellers in the Big East. You are too close to the situation IMO. Take the emotion out of it. Rutgers and Cincinnati were both absolutely horrid this season (I think Baylor is probably a mid to upper tier team in the Big East)
Tobias Fünke
Posts: 2,387
Dec 13, 2010 12:09am
Baylor would have run over Connecticut this season. Tulsa might have done so too, they were four points away from being 11-1 this season. If Houston didn't lose their quarterback, they'd win a few conference games too. Hell, even SMU would.
I'm simply saying only Baylor and Texas Tech would be the only teams with a >1% chance of leaving the Big 12. Texas A&M wouldn't, and of course Texas wouldn't.
I'm simply saying only Baylor and Texas Tech would be the only teams with a >1% chance of leaving the Big 12. Texas A&M wouldn't, and of course Texas wouldn't.