(04-23-2022 08:44 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:36 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:13 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  No way they invite TXST before UTEP

My thoughts as well. UTEP has had their struggles of late, but they are still a more attractive add than Texas State and fit the footprint while still being in Texas (even though West Texas is like a state unto itself).

If the MWC is calling either school, they’re in big time trouble.

That is not true. UTEP would be a good get for them.

(04-23-2022 09:04 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 08:44 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:36 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:13 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  No way they invite TXST before UTEP

My thoughts as well. UTEP has had their struggles of late, but they are still a more attractive add than Texas State and fit the footprint while still being in Texas (even though West Texas is like a state unto itself).

If the MWC is calling either school, they’re in big time trouble.

That is not true. UTEP would be a good get for them.

Um, how so?

(04-23-2022 07:21 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Aresco: The MWC will take SMU if they want a Texas school. I still can’t believe you brought the CUSA6 into the AAC. You should of invited UAB and Marshall and called it a day. You ruined the conference. Still talking about luring MWC schools and Army into the AAC I see…..lol. You couldn’t do it then and you sure as hell won’t be able to do it now.

UAB yes. FAU instead of Marshall. FAU has risen itself on field to a point that their market is a tiebreaker.

If I were Texas St i'd see how this new Sun Belt looks in action before leaping to an even further flung MWC. While Texas is a fertile recruiting ground so is the rest of the Sun Belt as opposed to the MWC who will use them to gain access to Texas recruits.

who is a the best plug and play for BSU if AAC schools are unavailable? Has to be Texas St. otherwise they have to go NDSU football only and hope to snag Zags. Otherwise they are stuck with UTEP or LA Tech.

(04-23-2022 09:06 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:04 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 08:44 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:36 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:13 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  No way they invite TXST before UTEP

My thoughts as well. UTEP has had their struggles of late, but they are still a more attractive add than Texas State and fit the footprint while still being in Texas (even though West Texas is like a state unto itself).

If the MWC is calling either school, they’re in big time trouble.

That is not true. UTEP would be a good get for them.

Um, how so?

Still waiting for this Marshall fan to tell us how UTEP would be a “good get” for the MWC.

(04-24-2022 05:00 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:06 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:04 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 08:44 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 07:36 PM)freshtop Wrote:  My thoughts as well. UTEP has had their struggles of late, but they are still a more attractive add than Texas State and fit the footprint while still being in Texas (even though West Texas is like a state unto itself).

If the MWC is calling either school, they’re in big time trouble.

That is not true. UTEP would be a good get for them.

Um, how so?

Still waiting for this Marshall fan to tell us how UTEP would be a “good get” for the MWC.

I can’t speak for him, but it didn’t escape my notice that UTEP just had their first winning football season and bowl appearance since 2014 and their first 20-win basketball season since 2014-15. It’s just one data point but it’s possible that after years of awfulness in both sports the Miners are finally turning the corner. If they can keep the momentum going and the MWC loses a member, I don’t see the conference having any qualms with bringing in UTEP as the replacement.

I believe there was a report that Thompson (MWC) wasn't interested in Texas State or UTEP.

Personally, I think Texas State needs to start gauging C-USA's interest, because I think the Belt is looking to tighten up their geography. And the western most members haven't been a priority for the Sun Belt.

(04-24-2022 05:15 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Personally, I think Texas State needs to start gauging C-USA's interest, because I think the Belt is looking to tighten up their geography. And the western most members haven't been a priority for the Sun Belt.

I agree that Texas State would be better served with CUSA membership.

CUSA has a better basketball brand, and its not even close.

Texas State would also have 2 instant in-state all-sports rivals as well (UTEP & SHSU).

Having UTEP and Louisiana Tech (and SHSU to a degree) is better for Texas State than ANYONE on the Sun Belt roster.

As a Sam Houston fan, I would be very happy with that school in San Marcos. It would help tighten the geography in the CUSA western flank.

Can’t imagine the Bobcats would be thrilled with such a move - being put in a league with Sam - but the Bobcats have basically swindled a decade head start on Sam Houston, have been surpassed (as I guaranteed a decade ago) by UTSA on the football field (and in conference prestige).

Either way, don’t see the San Marcos bunch joining the CUSA.

(04-24-2022 05:18 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:15 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Personally, I think Texas State needs to start gauging C-USA's interest, because I think the Belt is looking to tighten up their geography. And the western most members haven't been a priority for the Sun Belt.

I agree that Texas State would be better served with CUSA membership.

CUSA has a better basketball brand, and its not even close.

Texas State would also have 2 instant in-state all-sports rivals as well (UTEP & SHSU).

Having UTEP and Louisiana Tech (and SHSU to a degree) is better for Texas State than ANYONE on the Sun Belt roster.

Lol y'all are crazy. Why would we want to join that? The only positive would be basketball.

(04-24-2022 05:50 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:18 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:15 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Personally, I think Texas State needs to start gauging C-USA's interest, because I think the Belt is looking to tighten up their geography. And the western most members haven't been a priority for the Sun Belt.

I agree that Texas State would be better served with CUSA membership.

CUSA has a better basketball brand, and its not even close.

Texas State would also have 2 instant in-state all-sports rivals as well (UTEP & SHSU).

Having UTEP and Louisiana Tech (and SHSU to a degree) is better for Texas State than ANYONE on the Sun Belt roster.

Lol y'all are crazy. Why would we want to join that? The only positive would be basketball.

Agreed. The OP asked about the MWC versus the Sun Belt. I don’t see Texas State having any interest in stepping down to CUSA.

(04-24-2022 05:13 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:00 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:06 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:04 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 08:44 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  If the MWC is calling either school, they’re in big time trouble.

That is not true. UTEP would be a good get for them.

Um, how so?

Still waiting for this Marshall fan to tell us how UTEP would be a “good get” for the MWC.

I can’t speak for him, but it didn’t escape my notice that UTEP just had their first winning football season and bowl appearance since 2014 and their first 20-win basketball season since 2014-15. It’s just one data point but it’s possible that after years of awfulness in both sports the Miners are finally turning the corner. If they can keep the momentum going and the MWC loses a member, I don’t see the conference having any qualms with bringing in UTEP as the replacement.

1 year of making a throw away bowl game and a true debacle of a basketball tournament, makes them attractive to the MWC? We can all try and say if this school does this, then …, but the MWC has no reason to add them based on what they have done the last 10 years. Same with Texas State. Two really bad football programs and two extremely mediocre basketball programs. TSU and UTEP are not “gets”. If the MWC is adding them, they are on life support.

(04-24-2022 06:26 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:13 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:00 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:06 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:04 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  That is not true. UTEP would be a good get for them.

Um, how so?

Still waiting for this Marshall fan to tell us how UTEP would be a “good get” for the MWC.

I can’t speak for him, but it didn’t escape my notice that UTEP just had their first winning football season and bowl appearance since 2014 and their first 20-win basketball season since 2014-15. It’s just one data point but it’s possible that after years of awfulness in both sports the Miners are finally turning the corner. If they can keep the momentum going and the MWC loses a member, I don’t see the conference having any qualms with bringing in UTEP as the replacement.

1 year of making a throw away bowl game and a true debacle of a basketball tournament, makes them attractive to the MWC? We can all try and say if this school does this, then …, but the MWC has no reason to add them based on what they have done the last 10 years. Same with Texas State. Two really bad football programs and two extremely mediocre basketball programs. TSU and UTEP are not “gets”. If the MWC is adding them, they are on life support.

It seems you and I have very different definitions of what a conference on “life support” looks like.

Let’s take a worse case scenario. The Big 12 grabs Boise State and that triggers CSU and Air Force defections to the AAC. The MWC is left with 9 football members and 8 all-sports members. Can it backfill?

Of course. If it wants to expand to 10/9 it can invite UTEP. If it wants to to go to 10/10 instead it can invite UTEP and either (1) convert Hawaii to a full member or (2) bring in Denver from the Summit or (3) invite a western WAC school to join. If it wants to return to 12/11 it can invite UTEP and then either target NMSU+TSU or Montana+MSU. Less likely but possible other additions include NDSU and UC Davis.

Bottom line is that the MWC would still have options for rebuilding and stabilizing. Of course it would be competitively weaker, but not at risk of losing auto-bids and not in any kind of existential danger. Calling that being on “life support” strikes me as hyperbole.

(04-24-2022 05:50 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:18 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:15 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Personally, I think Texas State needs to start gauging C-USA's interest, because I think the Belt is looking to tighten up their geography. And the western most members haven't been a priority for the Sun Belt.

I agree that Texas State would be better served with CUSA membership.

CUSA has a better basketball brand, and its not even close.

Texas State would also have 2 instant in-state all-sports rivals as well (UTEP & SHSU).

Having UTEP and Louisiana Tech (and SHSU to a degree) is better for Texas State than ANYONE on the Sun Belt roster.

Lol y'all are crazy. Why would we want to join that? The only positive would be basketball.

The Sun Belt has a bit of history of nudging western members out the door (see Denver, New Orleans, Idaho, New Mexico St., Idaho, UT-Arlington, & Arkansas- Little Rock). Some of the new additions have a history of not supporting western membership too. Don't be shocked if Marshall and ODU stir up other eastern members to complain about having to travel to Texas.

The MWC ain't coming for Texas State. When the Belt pressures you to leave, C-USA will be the only FBS option short of going independent. The media deal is trash, but at least Texas State would have some regional rivals and decent basketball.

None of the schools on that list were full members of the conference. I think the Belt is more likely to split than to kick us out. Also theres a big difference between making 4 potential trips to TX vs 1. I know you look down on us for whatever reason but we'll be fine.

(04-24-2022 08:40 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 06:26 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:13 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 05:00 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(04-23-2022 09:06 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  Um, how so?

Still waiting for this Marshall fan to tell us how UTEP would be a “good get” for the MWC.

I can’t speak for him, but it didn’t escape my notice that UTEP just had their first winning football season and bowl appearance since 2014 and their first 20-win basketball season since 2014-15. It’s just one data point but it’s possible that after years of awfulness in both sports the Miners are finally turning the corner. If they can keep the momentum going and the MWC loses a member, I don’t see the conference having any qualms with bringing in UTEP as the replacement.

1 year of making a throw away bowl game and a true debacle of a basketball tournament, makes them attractive to the MWC? We can all try and say if this school does this, then …, but the MWC has no reason to add them based on what they have done the last 10 years. Same with Texas State. Two really bad football programs and two extremely mediocre basketball programs. TSU and UTEP are not “gets”. If the MWC is adding them, they are on life support.

It seems you and I have very different definitions of what a conference on “life support” looks like.

Let’s take a worse case scenario. The Big 12 grabs Boise State and that triggers CSU and Air Force defections to the AAC. The MWC is left with 9 football members and 8 all-sports members. Can it backfill?

Of course. If it wants to expand to 10/9 it can invite UTEP. If it wants to to go to 10/10 instead it can invite UTEP and either (1) convert Hawaii to a full member or (2) bring in Denver from the Summit or (3) invite a western WAC school to join. If it wants to return to 12/11 it can invite UTEP and then either target NMSU+TSU or Montana+MSU. Less likely but possible other additions include NDSU and UC Davis.

Bottom line is that the MWC would still have options for rebuilding and stabilizing. Of course it would be competitively weaker, but not at risk of losing auto-bids and not in any kind of existential danger. Calling that being on “life support” strikes me as hyperbole.

There aren’t many options west of Texas for the MWC to pick from. You just mentioned Denver? They are horrible and suck at basketball. If the MWC is even considering adding them, they’re on life support then too.

Still doesn’t answer my original question of why UTEP would be a good add to the MWC. They add nothing and would only be considered once the best teams are gone; when they’re on life support.

The MWC doesn’t need UTEP or any school for that matter…….yet.

Just like the MWC didn’t need Boise State (they were rejected multiple times) until they did. Ditto for Fresno State, Nevada, Utah State, Hawaii and San Jose State. If the MWC loses a school or two then UTEP or any school not in the AAC suddenly looks “attractive”. With that being said, the MWC is not expanding anytime soon so it’s a moot point.

The rumor is UTEP to the MWC has been a big no from the Pacific schools since they think the Front Range schools have too much power within the conference and UTEP would automatically vote with the Front Range schools on most matters. There’s no other FBS school in the Pacific time zone to invite to counterweight the power being on the Front Range side if UTEP was part of it. That and why would the MWC expand beyond 12 with limited tv money and exposure. Doesn’t make financial sense.

(04-24-2022 09:00 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  None of the schools on that list were full members of the conference. I think the Belt is more likely to split than to kick us out. Also theres a big difference between making 4 potential trips to TX vs 1. I know you look down on us for whatever reason but we'll be fine.

FBS conferences don't split. There's no CFP money in splitting and there are no NCAA credits for splitting. The Belt won't split.

The Sun Belt has already isolated Texas State. All but one of your fellow Belt members will be over 400 miles away from San Marcos. This year no Sun Belt championship or conference tournament was located in Texas. The Belt didn't extend any invitations to any schools west of the Mississippi river. Make of that what you wish.

(04-24-2022 09:45 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(04-24-2022 09:00 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  None of the schools on that list were full members of the conference. I think the Belt is more likely to split than to kick us out. Also theres a big difference between making 4 potential trips to TX vs 1. I know you look down on us for whatever reason but we'll be fine.

FBS conferences don't split. There's no CFP money in splitting and there are no NCAA credits for splitting. The Belt won't split.

The Sun Belt has already isolated Texas State. All but one of your fellow Belt members will be over 400 miles away from San Marcos. This year no Sun Belt championship or conference tournament was located in Texas. The Belt didn't extend any invitations to any schools west of the Mississippi river. Make of that what you wish.

And what schools west of the Mississippi should the SBC have invited?