(09-21-2021 07:07 AM)Fresno Fanatic Wrote:  Still need to see what Big12 will do the next couple years. I think the rest of the P5 are done, although that’s not in stone.

When all P5 moves are surely complete, and, sports networks are done bidding on pro sports (including hockey and soccer), CFP (hopefully 12 team), and P5 tv contracts, THEN, the rest of us can make moves if sports networks have enough available capital and time slots left over.

If AFA and CSU want to make a move to AAC now, then, more power to them if Memphis and USF get added to Big12 in a couple of years right before/during Big12 tv contract negotiations.

Losing USF would be "addition by subtraction" at this point, and the AAC can reload with the strongest eastern FB and BB schools, some of which have had viewership similar to Memphis's. Replacing Memphis and USF with two high quality, high viewership G5 schools would maintain the status quo for the AAC. Not a big concern.

(09-21-2021 07:47 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 07:07 AM)Fresno Fanatic Wrote:  Still need to see what Big12 will do the next couple years. I think the rest of the P5 are done, although that’s not in stone.

When all P5 moves are surely complete, and, sports networks are done bidding on pro sports (including hockey and soccer), CFP (hopefully 12 team), and P5 tv contracts, THEN, the rest of us can make moves if sports networks have enough available capital and time slots left over.

If AFA and CSU want to make a move to AAC now, then, more power to them if Memphis and USF get added to Big12 in a couple of years right before/during Big12 tv contract negotiations.

Losing USF would be "addition by subtraction" at this point, and the AAC can reload with the strongest eastern FB and BB schools, some of which have had viewership similar to Memphis's. Replacing Memphis and USF with two high quality, high viewership G5 schools would maintain the status quo for the AAC. Not a big concern.

Memphis has better viewership than at least one of the schools selected for the Big 12. There are NO remaining schools with viewership numbers similar to Memphis and Boise. If there were, they’d be in the discussion for the next round of call ups. Doesn’t mean that numbers can’t be grown, (they can) just no reason to make things up…or cherry pick data.

(09-20-2021 10:00 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Not going to happen. MWC is much stronger all sports now than AAC.

Come on, ALL SPORTS doesn't count when it comes to realignment. Football drives the bus. Barring the occasional one-off (UConn WBB) the only other sport that matters is MBB. Col St isn't going to pass on an AAC invite because baseball, lacrosse or women's soccer is better in the MWC. They are called non-revenue sports for a reason. That being said, the BE has allowed some non-revenue sports to play an all OOC regular season schedule to offset travel costs. The AAC could do the same.
The MWC schools will pass if the numbers don't show a net positive. Is the increased travel in some Olympic sports overcome by increased revenue in football/basketball. If the answer is yes, then you will probably see the MWC loose schools. If the answer is no, then they will stay.

(09-20-2021 10:20 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:12 PM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:07 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:03 PM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  If the MWC had any vision, the first thing they would do is go to St Marys and offer them all sports (that they sponsor) membership. Without BYU in the WCC SMC will have to beat gonzaga at least once to make the dance which wont happen most years. In the MWC they will have more opportunities to actually earn at large bids by beating more beatable quality opponents. The MWC can even offer a nice cut of football $$$. If SMC accepts well... gonzaga will almost certainly have to leave. 10 team round robin football, and 11 team 20 game schedule round robin basketball in what would inevitably be the 7th best league. There is ZERO chance the MWC is smart enough to pull this, but my 0.02

I just think St Mary’s has an extremely talented HC, and when he’s gone, they are done.

I think you very well could be right, it would more be an attempt to force gonzagas hand. Even if Bennet leaves and they become mediocre. The travel partners (minus wY and UNM) are really nice for olympic sports in the conference and it gives the conference a nice stable far west identity. You could achieve this by adding UC Davis instead.

New Mexico St basketball has had a sustained run for 50 years. A tourney team including sweet 16’s and a final 4. They are tough every year with a good fan base and a very nice arena (I’ve heard).

I apologize for being super unclear. You dont add SMC for anything they actually bring. You add them to put a gun to Gonzagas head and force them to join. We have already heard whispers of "can gonzaga win a title in the wcc?" If you take out byu and smc, that conference is, with all do respect, not good and it could harm their basketball program. I think in a vacuum nmsu is better add but nmsu does little to nothing to attract gonzaga. The while add smc thing is about acquiring gonzaga and having a ball league on par with the bottom end p6 basketball leagues.

Confident AF isn't leaving the Mtn West.

(09-21-2021 08:26 AM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:20 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:12 PM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:07 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:03 PM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  If the MWC had any vision, the first thing they would do is go to St Marys and offer them all sports (that they sponsor) membership. Without BYU in the WCC SMC will have to beat gonzaga at least once to make the dance which wont happen most years. In the MWC they will have more opportunities to actually earn at large bids by beating more beatable quality opponents. The MWC can even offer a nice cut of football $$$. If SMC accepts well... gonzaga will almost certainly have to leave. 10 team round robin football, and 11 team 20 game schedule round robin basketball in what would inevitably be the 7th best league. There is ZERO chance the MWC is smart enough to pull this, but my 0.02

I just think St Mary’s has an extremely talented HC, and when he’s gone, they are done.

I think you very well could be right, it would more be an attempt to force gonzagas hand. Even if Bennet leaves and they become mediocre. The travel partners (minus wY and UNM) are really nice for olympic sports in the conference and it gives the conference a nice stable far west identity. You could achieve this by adding UC Davis instead.

New Mexico St basketball has had a sustained run for 50 years. A tourney team including sweet 16’s and a final 4. They are tough every year with a good fan base and a very nice arena (I’ve heard).

I apologize for being super unclear. You dont add SMC for anything they actually bring. You add them to put a gun to Gonzagas head and force them to join. We have already heard whispers of "can gonzaga win a title in the wcc?" If you take out byu and smc, that conference is, with all do respect, not good and it could harm their basketball program. I think in a vacuum nmsu is better add but nmsu does little to nothing to attract gonzaga. The while add smc thing is about acquiring gonzaga and having a ball league on par with the bottom end p6 basketball leagues.

I got ya now ok.

(09-21-2021 08:29 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Confident AF isn't leaving the Mtn West.

I’d rather have Appy St then AF to be honest.
I hate triple option teams. They cause way too may injuries with that chop blocking style

(09-20-2021 11:44 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:38 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:33 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:27 PM)polkhigh Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:02 PM)solohawks Wrote:  That's worst case scenario for CUSA as they are left with a bunch of eastern schools, LA Tech, USM and UTEP.

There's even talk of USM and Marshall leaving CUSA. I'd say after that it'll be all she wrote.

Yeah, well where exactly would the remaining teams go?

The conference is not going to disband.

They’ll go to the SB?

If 6 of 14 teams leave that means 8 remain. They can add NMSU or Liberty. Maybe even take a Sun Belt team like Texas St. Worst case remain at 8. Really desperate move would be to add FCS WAC teams.

Or they can take the best of the Sun Belt and the SB teams get to leave UALR, UTA and ULM behind.

I think the AAC could sit at 10 and it not be much of a concern, but I'm not sure the MWC can. The AAC has an extensive list of schools they can always add at any moment that fit in their current footprint (even if some of us don't love the options there's a whole bunch of them). The MWC doesn't have the same list of options, essentially there is 1 FBS team in their current footprint that isn't in the league (NMSU) and if they sit at 10 and then were to happen to lose Boise and SDSU to the B12 you could start having actual survival issues. The Texas schools at that point might not see the value in going out west in a MWC without Boise/SDSU/AFA/CSU. Right now UTSA/UTEP/UNT and others would almost certainly join, and once they join it makes survival easier because you can keep adding central time zone members.

(09-21-2021 06:49 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:10 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:12 PM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:07 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 10:03 PM)mvcfan76 Wrote:  If the MWC had any vision, the first thing they would do is go to St Marys and offer them all sports (that they sponsor) membership. Without BYU in the WCC SMC will have to beat gonzaga at least once to make the dance which wont happen most years. In the MWC they will have more opportunities to actually earn at large bids by beating more beatable quality opponents. The MWC can even offer a nice cut of football $$$. If SMC accepts well... gonzaga will almost certainly have to leave. 10 team round robin football, and 11 team 20 game schedule round robin basketball in what would inevitably be the 7th best league. There is ZERO chance the MWC is smart enough to pull this, but my 0.02

I just think St Mary’s has an extremely talented HC, and when he’s gone, they are done.

I think you very well could be right, it would more be an attempt to force gonzagas hand. Even if Bennet leaves and they become mediocre. The travel partners (minus wY and UNM) are really nice for olympic sports in the conference and it gives the conference a nice stable far west identity. You could achieve this by adding UC Davis instead.

UC Davis is an up-and-comer. Big school with lots of graduates throughout California. They’re putting the finishing touches on a $50 million athletic performance center. Their stadium is designed to be expanded to 30,000 so it wouldn’t take a huge investment for them to go FBS.

But that’s for another day. If CSU and AFA bail, I think the MWC will stand pat with the remaining 10 members. The conference was comfortable operating with 8-9 members from its founding until the 2010-11 realignment cycle. Gonzaga will be approached as a potential 10th basketball member to balance Hawaii’s football-only membership. If the Zags say no I wouldn’t be surprised to see Grand Canyon get a call and accept immediately.

I don’t think we can stay at 10/9 in these times. We’ll need to expand to have some safety in numbers as a conference overall. Just look at the Big 12. They were put in a precarious position with OU UT leaving.

That’s certainly a legitimate concern. As I posted on the MWC board, I think the conference’s two best strategic options if AFA and CSU leave are to stand pat or to expand to 14 with four Texas schools (some combo of North Texas, Rice, UTSA, UTEP and Texas State).

The appeal of standing pat is that it would likely increase the per-school payout in the short run and might actually improve the football and basketball strength of the conference. The downside is the negative national perception stemming from getting raided and "doing nothing", and the reality that if we were to lose any more members in the next round of realignment it would be even harder to backfill by expanding into Texas.

Expansion to 14 would reduce payouts and weaken the MWC competitively in the short run, but would provide a buffer in the event of future defections, and could have a higher long-term payoff if the new additions invest in their programs and if all conference members are able to recruit better in Texas. It’s the logical choice if the conference members are feeling risk-averse.

I’m predicting the MWC will opt for the stand pat option for two reasons. First, the conference will still have its strongest football programs in the fold. And second, there are still vivid memories of the conference’s history of attaining national prominence with only 9 members. I suspect Boise State, SDSU and Fresno State are feeling pretty confident right now that they can become a future reincarnation of the old BYU/Utah/TCU triumvirate. The question is whether that confidence will overcome the fears of the other MWC members who know a Big 12 call-up isn’t in any of their futures.

Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

(09-21-2021 09:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:44 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:38 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:33 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(09-20-2021 11:27 PM)polkhigh Wrote:  There's even talk of USM and Marshall leaving CUSA. I'd say after that it'll be all she wrote.

Yeah, well where exactly would the remaining teams go?

The conference is not going to disband.

They’ll go to the SB?

If 6 of 14 teams leave that means 8 remain. They can add NMSU or Liberty. Maybe even take a Sun Belt team like Texas St. Worst case remain at 8. Really desperate move would be to add FCS WAC teams.

Or they can take the best of the Sun Belt and the SB teams get to leave UALR, UTA and ULM behind.

So they can play on Stadium and Facebook Live? I'll admit, the SB being on ESPN+ for a good portion of games isn't much better, but the exposure on the ESPN linear networks is much better than CBSSN or other platforms C-USA offers.

C-USA fans are by and large miserable. SB fans are by and large content. Of course, fans of both leagues would prefer the AAC. That's a given. But I don't think anyone is any more excited about playing UTEP than they would be ULM, save for La. Tech.

UTA and LR are likely headed to other leagues.

The C-USA vs. SB debate, in 2021, not 2011-2014, is up in the air until we start seeing press conferences of one school leaving for the other league.

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

They may not backfill at all. Ten members is very doable.

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

I still think even without those 2 the MWC currently could add 2 Texas schools. The C-USA TV deal is so bad and honestly UTEP really should be in the MWC anyway. Now I think it would get dicey if they lost Boise and SDSU to the B12 later. I still suspect UTEP would join and obviously NMSU is always the emergency option, but then it starts getting really questionable if the other Texas schools would join for a league that at that point wouldn't look that great. Maybe Idaho would come back to FBS? I have no idea about Montana or the Dakota schools and their FBS interests. Honestly it probably wasn't the best idea from a long term perspective to kill the WAC as an FBS league. Having them as a farm league for future raids would have had value. While future defections from the AAC would continue to further weaken the league other than wet dreams of posters on this board there's way too many schools that would join no questions asked for the league to ever actually die.

I would imagine that if the American poaches Mountain West schools, they’re going to take at least three and maybe four of them. I honestly don’t see how Rice fits into any of this?

UAB is a bit of a different story. I can see how the Blazers fit in. I’m not sure I prefer them over a fourth Mountain West school, but I see their appeal. I don’t see any appeal whatsoever with Rice. I don’t think they help you recruit any better in Texas and they are non-competitive. It’s an amazing university, so they get a big checkmark in that regard. However, I just don’t see the fit there.

If I were the American, and the Mountain West schools were amenable to it, which is far from guaranteed, I would select Colorado State, Air Force, San Diego State and Boise State.

Then, your divisional alignment would look like this:
East
East Carolina
Memphis
South Florida
Temple
Tulane
Tulsa

West
Air Force
Boise State
Colorado State
Navy
San Diego State
SMU

If Navy would rather stay east, you just swap them with Tulsa. I think the Midshipmen will choose to stay in the west.

Then, if you expand the 14 teams, or if you lose more programs to say, the Big 12, that’s where UAB comes in to play, IMHO. Suddenly, you probably would want another eastern school to balance out all the new western programs. On the western side, you add someone like UNLV or Nevada or New Mexico and you’re all set.

(09-21-2021 10:35 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

They may not backfill at all. Ten members is very doable.

10 is fine, in fact I might argue 10 is the ideal number in a stable environment and if you know you have a bench of schools who will always join if the need comes. Both of those are questionable in the case of the MWC. In the AAC's case I've been up front without MWC schools I wouldn't go above 10 and would even consider just 9, but that's because there's a nearly unlimited number of schools in the east that would join no questions asked at any time no matter how much people want to say otherwise. A MWC without AFA/CSU/SDSU/Boise might have trouble attracting schools outside the current footprint, and there are only 2 current FBS schools in the footprint (UTEP and NMSU).

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

I think the question is moot because if no Texas schools are willing to come over the MWC will just stand pat with 10.

Of course that changes if the Big 12 circles back and poaches Boise State and/or SDSU. In that scenario the backfill options are limited but adequate. NMSU would be first on the list: land-grant research university in the footprint, still FBS with acceptable fan base (18K per-game attendance), anxious to escape independence, and strong in basketball (seven WAC titles in the past ten years). Montana would be next: state flagship research university in the footprint, strong in FCS football with ample fan base (24K per-game attendance), also strong in basketball (four Big Sky titles in the past ten years).

After those two the pickings get very slim, e.g. Montana State and/or UC Davis and/or NDSU (football-only) as additional FCS move-ups.

(09-21-2021 10:55 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

I think the question is moot because if no Texas schools are willing to come over the MWC will just stand pat with 10.

Of course that changes if the Big 12 circles back and poaches Boise State and/or SDSU. In that scenario the backfill options are limited but adequate. NMSU would be first on the list: land-grant research university in the footprint, still FBS with acceptable fan base (18K per-game attendance), anxious to escape independence, and strong in basketball (seven WAC titles in the past ten years). Montana would be next: state flagship research university in the footprint, strong in FCS football with ample fan base (24K per-game attendance), also strong in basketball (four Big Sky titles in the past 10 years).

After those two the pickings get very slim, e.g. Montana State or UC Davis or NDSU (football-only) as a second FCS move-up.

NDSU is 800 miles from the nearest MWC. Adding NDSU means MWC is in a desperate for survival situation

(09-21-2021 10:55 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

I think the question is moot because if no Texas schools are willing to come over the MWC will just stand pat with 10.

Of course that changes if the Big 12 circles back and poaches Boise State and/or SDSU. In that scenario the backfill options are limited but adequate. NMSU would be first on the list: land-grant research university in the footprint, still FBS with acceptable fan base (18K per-game attendance), anxious to escape independence, and strong in basketball (seven WAC titles in the past ten years). Montana would be next: state flagship research university in the footprint, strong in FCS football with ample fan base (24K per-game attendance), also strong in basketball (four Big Sky titles in the past ten years).

After those two the pickings get very slim, e.g. Montana State and/or UC Davis and/or NDSU (football-only) as additional FCS move-ups.

I ask this because I have no idea but does Montana even have any urge to come to FBS?

(09-21-2021 11:02 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 10:55 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 10:26 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Who are the backfills for the MWC? I don't see obvious choices. A lot of people are saying UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, but after losing the Colorado schools I don't see a fit for the Texas schools. Are they looking at NDSU or some other FCS? Idaho and NMSU probably non-starters.

I think the question is moot because if no Texas schools are willing to come over the MWC will just stand pat with 10.

Of course that changes if the Big 12 circles back and poaches Boise State and/or SDSU. In that scenario the backfill options are limited but adequate. NMSU would be first on the list: land-grant research university in the footprint, still FBS with acceptable fan base (18K per-game attendance), anxious to escape independence, and strong in basketball (seven WAC titles in the past ten years). Montana would be next: state flagship research university in the footprint, strong in FCS football with ample fan base (24K per-game attendance), also strong in basketball (four Big Sky titles in the past 10 years).

After those two the pickings get very slim, e.g. Montana State or UC Davis or NDSU (football-only) as a second FCS move-up.

NDSU is 800 miles from the nearest MWC. Adding NDSU means MWC is in a desperate for survival situation

Agreed. Actually having to add anyone beyond NMSU means the MWC is in a desperate situation. Bringing in FCS schools is pretty much a last resort.