Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Antarctic79

OT: What is New Mexico State's future

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Hoser said:

I don't think UNM will back NMSU for inclusion into the MWC.  It might be a smart move if they did, but I do not see that happening.  NMSU is in a quandary as far as finding a conference that will accept them.  They were in the Sunbelt for a while and were basically booted out.  Personally, I think they should try and get into the Big Sky.  I think they would compete quite well in that conference.  Not sure what the situation is as far as the BS adding more schools is but I think they would do well there.  Don't know enough about the Sky to make a judgment on NMSU jumping on board.

I will say this though, NMSU is much better than SJSU and what they would do for the MWC.  Yes, San Jose has the population but what is it really doing for the MWC?

 

How does Southern Utah, Northern Colorado, Eastern Washington and the Montanas sound to you?  NMSU would likely dominate the Big Sky.  But I don't think they would be happy there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jdgaucho said:

 

How does Southern Utah, Northern Colorado, Eastern Washington and the Montanas sound to you?  NMSU would likely dominate the Big Sky.  But I don't think they would be happy there.

How many schools would the Big Sky have if they added NMSU ?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

How many schools would the Big Sky have if they added NMSU ?? 

12.  NMSU effectively replaces North Dakota.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoser said:

I don't think UNM will back NMSU for inclusion into the MWC.  It might be a smart move if they did, but I do not see that happening.  NMSU is in a quandary as far as finding a conference that will accept them.  They were in the Sunbelt for a while and were basically booted out.  Personally, I think they should try and get into the Big Sky.  I think they would compete quite well in that conference.  Not sure what the situation is as far as the BS adding more schools is but I think they would do well there.  Don't know enough about the Sky to make a judgment on NMSU jumping on board.

I will say this though, NMSU is much better than SJSU and what they would do for the MWC.  Yes, San Jose has the population but what is it really doing for the MWC?

Damn, one 6-6 season is enough to overcome a 3-17 record against SJSU and make them “much better”? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Plus 2 football only schools.

 

North/South divisions are the best groupings if you want to go that route.  

Big Sky North - Portland State, EWU, Montana, Montana State, Idaho, Idaho State 

Big Sky South - Sac State, NAU, Weber State, SUU, Northern Colorado, NMSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jdgaucho said:

 

North/South divisions are the best groupings if you want to go that route.  

Big Sky North - Portland State, EWU, Montana, Montana State, Idaho, Idaho State 

Big Sky South - Sac State, NAU, Weber State, SUU, Northern Colorado, NMSU

Are you predicting they will kick out UC Davis and Cal Poly as football only members?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Are you predicting they will kick out UC Davis and Cal Poly as football only members?

 

No, the current arrangement works well for everyone.  There's no benefit in kicking out Davis and Poly football.  That would open up Pandora's Box, potentially resulting in Sac State (and NMSU?) joining the Big West which revives football as an FCS conference.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2017 at 10:41 AM, RogueStout said:

It is going to be very difficult for the Red Aggies to be able to fill out their schedules going forward while trying to have 6 home games.

Best of luck to them.

I still think it was a mistake to kill the WAC. We should have left USU/SJSU alone and let it survive for scheduling purposes.

Pretty short sighted.

We????  Neither BSU nor SDS were part of the "we".  Allow me to recall to you how things went down.  In Dec. 2011 BSU and SDS notified the MWC that they would be leaving the MWC for the BE.  Both agreed to park their Olympic sports in the Big West.  As a result, in May 2012 USU and SJS were invited to join the MWC as replacements.  Neither BSU nor SDS had a say in that vote as both already had a foot out the door.  But having made the decision to go to the Big East, by Dec. 2012 the deal had almost completely unraveled.  Football members in the BE began to bail, projected $ for their television rights began to drastically drop, and they couldn't come to any agreement with BSU on a sweetheart deal for the Broncos to retain broadcast rights for their home games.  The final straw was the basketball-only schools bolting to form a new conference.

 

By the end of 2012 BSU agreed to return to the MWC, abandon the Big West, pay exit fees (with help from the MWC) to the Big East and get the sweetheart deal it sought from the MWC.  With BSU's reneging, SDS was left hanging.  But BSU had thrown the Aztecs a lifeline when the Broncos negotiated their own return.  The lifeline was that before the MWC would seek other conference members, it had to provide the right of first refusal to SDS.  If the Aztecs had not made a decision by Jan. 31, 2013, the MWC could seek others to replace it.  It was reported that some MWC members preferred other candidates, including BYU.  On Jan. 16, 2013, SDS elected to return to the MWC and was voted in by the MWC members.  Exit fees had to be paid by SDS to the Big West but none were owned to the Big East due to the fact that the conference couldn't come up with any other western team to be in the conference with SDS after BSU left.  SDS returned under the terms the MWC offered, with no BSU-like sweetheart deal.  

 

As you can see, USU and SJS were invited to the MWC precisely as a result of BSU and SDS leaving for "greener pastures" — which never materialized.  Inviting those two schools was not short-sighted at all.  It was a matter of desperation and survival.  If there was any short-sightedness, it was on the part of SDS and BSU — particularly the former.  SDS mistakenly thought it had BSU-like leverage.  It didn't.  Neither BSU nor SDS had a voice or a vote on the admission of USU/SJS to the MWC.  Interestingly, both SJS and USU voted to extend invitations to BSU and SDS to return.  You are welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, utaggies said:

We????  Neither BSU nor SDS were part of the "we".  Allow me to recall to you how things went down.  In Dec. 2011 BSU and SDS notified the MWC that they would be leaving the MWC for the BE.  Both agreed to park their Olympic sports in the Big West.  As a result, in May 2012 USU and SJS were invited to join the MWC as replacements.  Neither BSU nor SDS had a say in that vote as both already had a foot out the door.  But having made the decision to go to the Big East, by Dec. 2012 the deal had almost completely unraveled.  Football members in the BE began to bail, projected $ for their television rights began to drastically drop, and they couldn't come to any agreement with BSU on a sweetheart deal for the Broncos to retain broadcast rights for their home games.  The final straw was the basketball-only schools bolting to form a new conference.

 

By the end of 2012 BSU agreed to return to the MWC, abandon the Big West, pay exit fees (with help from the MWC) to the Big East and get the sweetheart deal it sought from the MWC.  With BSU's reneging, SDS was left hanging.  But BSU had thrown the Aztecs a lifeline when the Broncos negotiated their own return.  The lifeline was that before the MWC would seek other conference members, it had to provide the right of first refusal to SDS.  If the Aztecs had not made a decision by Jan. 31, 2013, the MWC could seek others to replace it.  It was reported that some MWC members preferred other candidates, including BYU.  On Jan. 16, 2013, SDS elected to return to the MWC and was voted in by the MWC members.  Exit fees had to be paid by SDS to the Big West but none were owned to the Big East due to the fact that the conference couldn't come up with any other western team to be in the conference with SDS after BSU left.  SDS returned under the terms the MWC offered, with no BSU-like sweetheart deal.  

 

As you can see, USU and SJS were invited to the MWC precisely as a result of BSU and SDS leaving for "greener pastures" — which never materialized.  Inviting those two schools was not short-sighted at all.  It was a matter of desperation and survival.  If there was any short-sightedness, it was on the part of SDS and BSU — particularly the former.  SDS mistakenly thought it had BSU-like leverage.  It didn't.  Neither BSU nor SDS had a voice or a vote on the admission of USU/SJS to the MWC.  Interestingly, both SJS and USU voted to extend invitations to BSU and SDS to return.  You are welcome.

Exactly, SDSU and Boise fans blaming everyone else for adding USU is quite ironic. It was them leaving that caused the additions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, bigd said:

Exactly, SDSU and Boise fans blaming everyone else for adding USU is quite ironic. It was them leaving that caused the additions.

Yeah but nobody forced you to bang the ugly chick after getting dumped. You should have just joined a gym, got in singles shape, and waited until we came crawling back with regret.

FWIW, I have no problem with the USU addition as they at least have a fan base and decent facilities. It’s SJSU which was a total head scratcher.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, utaggies said:

We????  Neither BSU nor SDS were part of the "we".  Allow me to recall to you how things went down.  In Dec. 2011 BSU and SDS notified the MWC that they would be leaving the MWC for the BE.  Both agreed to park their Olympic sports in the Big West.  As a result, in May 2012 USU and SJS were invited to join the MWC as replacements.  Neither BSU nor SDS had a say in that vote as both already had a foot out the door.  But having made the decision to go to the Big East, by Dec. 2012 the deal had almost completely unraveled.  Football members in the BE began to bail, projected $ for their television rights began to drastically drop, and they couldn't come to any agreement with BSU on a sweetheart deal for the Broncos to retain broadcast rights for their home games.  The final straw was the basketball-only schools bolting to form a new conference.

 

By the end of 2012 BSU agreed to return to the MWC, abandon the Big West, pay exit fees (with help from the MWC) to the Big East and get the sweetheart deal it sought from the MWC.  With BSU's reneging, SDS was left hanging.  But BSU had thrown the Aztecs a lifeline when the Broncos negotiated their own return.  The lifeline was that before the MWC would seek other conference members, it had to provide the right of first refusal to SDS.  If the Aztecs had not made a decision by Jan. 31, 2013, the MWC could seek others to replace it.  It was reported that some MWC members preferred other candidates, including BYU.  On Jan. 16, 2013, SDS elected to return to the MWC and was voted in by the MWC members.  Exit fees had to be paid by SDS to the Big West but none were owned to the Big East due to the fact that the conference couldn't come up with any other western team to be in the conference with SDS after BSU left.  SDS returned under the terms the MWC offered, with no BSU-like sweetheart deal.  

 

As you can see, USU and SJS were invited to the MWC precisely as a result of BSU and SDS leaving for "greener pastures" — which never materialized.  Inviting those two schools was not short-sighted at all.  It was a matter of desperation and survival.  If there was any short-sightedness, it was on the part of SDS and BSU — particularly the former.  SDS mistakenly thought it had BSU-like leverage.  It didn't.  Neither BSU nor SDS had a voice or a vote on the admission of USU/SJS to the MWC.  Interestingly, both SJS and USU voted to extend invitations to BSU and SDS to return.  You are welcome.

lol

To get technical there isn’t a “we” involved in 99% of the stuff we refer to on this board as “we”, do settle down little fella. “We” haven’t really dominated USU in Football, because I don’t play on the team. See how that works?

I meant “we” as in the MWC, and my statement stands.

And to say the invitation to SJSU and USU was a matter of “survival” for the MWC is LAUGHABLE! LOL!! The argument, actually FACT is that we (see how that works!) would be better off without you.

Dumb ass.

lamb-with-human-face-150331-670.jpg?itok

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

Really all it would take is seismic activity in the B12, and the ripples from that could seriously damage the MWC - NMSU fans should be watching Texas & Oklahoma in the B12.......if that tectonic plate shifts, it could be felt across the continent and leave the MWC in smoldering ruins if the richter scale reading is high 

The B12 losing Texas and Oklahoma in 2023-24 timeframe is the best hope right now.

As far as other posts about pursuing the Big Sky, it makes no sense right now at all.  We have a competitive football team at the G5 level and are going bowling for the first time in forever.  2018 and 2019 schedules are basically done.  MWC/CUSA/Sun Belt seem willing to schedule us and we have 4 FBS G5 games already booked for 2020 and 2021.  Regarding basketball,  the WAC hasn't seemed to hurt us.  Weir replaced Menzies and had one great season and moved on.  Jans came in and we are 6-1 with the latest RPI ranking i saw of 66.  How many MWC teams are top 100?  How many are top 200?  As long as the basketball continues to recruit and win year in and year out and has a good RPI and the football can schedule G5 teams and be competitive,  exactly what is the incentive to look at Big Sky?  Stability?  We have it for oly sports for at least 3 years.  WAC falling apart?  We have 8 teams, CSUB already has its replacement coming in and isn't leaving until 2020 anyways.  Additional revenue?  I can tell you i don't know a single fan that would rather see a 7-9 win FCS team against the likes of Idaho State and Montana State over a 4-6 win team over the likes of UNM and UTEP.  It just doesn't sell.  As an FCS,  G5 schools would never come to AMS.  No thanks.  

Can circumstances come up very quickly that force NMSU to reconsider?  Sure, but that will always be the case.  The MWC just had to reinvent itself 6 years ago after TCU, Utah, and BYU left. It happens.  Oly sports will always have options considering the success of our men's basketball program.  I see absolutely no downside to playing the FBS card until there are no more options.  Going bowling our final year in Sun Belt?  Heck, that's just icing on the cake.  NMSU made the right decision to go indy and reject Big Sky possibility for the moment.  4 or 5 years from now,  we may be in a different situation.  For now,  everything has lined up as good as we could hope.  The 2018 schedule is really cool, a great mixture of G5 conferences plus our 2 rivals as always.  2019 isn't bad.  

As far as the Big West,  that's always a possibility our there on the horizon.  The conference would have to expand their footprint and have done so in the past.  Again, we are talking 5 years out at least and anything can happen.  In their current form,  i see no advantage in Big West versus top of WAC - NMSU, GCU, UVU, CSUB, Seattle.  None.  Does that mean NMSU wouldn't consider Big West as an option if they came calling in the future?  i am sure we would listen.  

FBS football is like the golden ticket in Willy Wonka movie.  There are precious few and NMSU should hold on with both hands until there are absolutely no other options,  assuming it doesn't affect our oly sports negatively and we are competitive with schools like UNM/UTEP in football.  So far it hasn't hurt basketball.  RPI of 66,  multiple NCAA tourneys,  6-1 to start this latest season, etc, etc.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RogueStout said:

lol

To get technical there isn’t a “we” involved in 99% of the stuff we refer to on this board as “we”, do settle down little fella. “We” haven’t really dominated USU in Football, because I don’t play on the team. See how that works?

I meant “we” as in the MWC, and my statement stands.

And to say the invitation to SJSU and USU was a matter of “survival” for the MWC is LAUGHABLE! LOL!! The argument, actually FACT is that we (see how that works!) would be better off without you.

Dumb ass.

Uhh...yes it was survival, because with BSU and SDSU departure, that dropped the MW to 7 full members as Hawaii is only a football member.  You need, 8 members to be a FBS conference.  So USU was invite for the #8/9 spot. But guess what? the SDSU departure left the MW down to 5 baseball schools and then the MW would lose the auto-bid to the baseball playoffs. SJSU not only rounded out football to 10 members but also gave a 9th member in basketball that was needed not only for scheduling but for insurance for another possible departure.  But the big need was for SJSU to fill the #6 baseball spot to keep the auto-bid for the MW.  

While everyone is focused on football, there are other factors(sports) that are involved with the NCAA rules for conferences that are need to be complied to in order to survive as a conference. 

But...let's not forget that while NMSU would have helped the MW with baseball, SJSU was coming off a Top 25 ranking and had much better support than NMSU and our TV people agreed which is another reason SJSU was added over NMSU.   

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, VandalPride97 said:

Our President should be waterboarded, castrated (assuming there's anything there) and burned at the stake.  I'll never forgive UNM for choosing a president more qualified.  You hear that, Lobos?  You're dead to me.

My fondest hope is that we get a progressive president and do well enough in FBS to merit moving back up, although that would be very far in the future.  In the meantime, I'll try to make the best of a terrible situation, which is like eating a shit sandwich and pretending it's a PB&J.

I am glad to hear that you aren't bitter.  I was afraid for a while that you would take this badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2017 at 12:06 PM, SleepingGiantsFan said:

"We" did leave USU and SJSU alone as your school and mine had nothing to do with that dumb decision.

Easy with that shit. One of these is not like the other. 

There are only two things I can't stand in this world: people who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RogueStout said:

lol

To get technical there isn’t a “we” involved in 99% of the stuff we refer to on this board as “we”, do settle down little fella. “We” haven’t really dominated USU in Football, because I don’t play on the team. See how that works?

I meant “we” as in the MWC, and my statement stands.

And to say the invitation to SJSU and USU was a matter of “survival” for the MWC is LAUGHABLE! LOL!! The argument, actually FACT is that we (see how that works!) would be better off without you.

Dumb ass.

I have no problem with the use of using the collective "we" regarding one's team or conference.  But my point was that neither BSU nor SDS was part of the "we" whose decision it was to accept USU and SJS into the conference.  "Your" team couldn't vote.  "Your" team was already an outsider with no vested interest in the MWC. As a USU fan I don't say to a Wyoming fan, "We should never have invited Nevada into the conference."  

Thanks to MWC Tex for saving me a lot of time in responding to your poorly thought out comment about the survival mode that the MWC was in when it invited USU and SJS.

Look — I've got no beaf with either you or "your" team about its actions to leave the MWC nor its return.  BSU is my second-favorite MWC team.  I'm from Boise and cheered for BJC, BSC and BSU for years.  Nothing I said was disparaging.  BSU's and SDS' decisions were based on self-interest, which is what drives conference affiliation decisions.  It's just the way it is.  But "One for all and all for one" is a fairytale.  The collective interests of the conference are WAY secondary to self-interest.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MWC Tex said:

Uhh...yes it was survival, because with BSU and SDSU departure, that dropped the MW to 7 full members as Hawaii is only a football member.  You need, 8 members to be a FBS conference.  So USU was invite for the #8/9 spot. But guess what? the SDSU departure left the MW down to 5 baseball schools and then the MW would lose the auto-bid to the baseball playoffs. SJSU not only rounded out football to 10 members but also gave a 9th member in basketball that was needed not only for scheduling but for insurance for another possible departure.  But the big need was for SJSU to fill the #6 baseball spot to keep the auto-bid for the MW.  

While everyone is focused on football, there are other factors(sports) that are involved with the NCAA rules for conferences that are need to be complied to in order to survive as a conference. 

But...let's not forget that while NMSU would have helped the MW with baseball, SJSU was coming off a Top 25 ranking and had much better support than NMSU and our TV people agreed which is another reason SJSU was added over NMSU.   

  

Hair: Hawaii you either join as a full member or you’re out

Hawaii: Ok

 

lamb-with-human-face-150331-670.jpg?itok

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Damn, one 6-6 season is enough to overcome a 3-17 record against SJSU and make them “much better”? 

I am guessing he was talking about this year only and the answer is yes we are better.  I don't think anyone cares what any team was like 10 years ago much less 20+.   Everyone knows we are a basketball school first.  Football has been a challenge to say the least to have one good season, much less any consistency year to year.  Our last 7 win season was in the Sun Belt many moons ago before the WAC years.  While we may not replicate this year's success in football, the team is set up nicely to compete next year with 3 MWC schools on the schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...