Jump to content

Archived

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

LoboJ

New WAC

Recommended Posts

New 10 or 11 team WAC conference (assuming MWC takes Fresno and Boise and maybe Houston)

Hawaii-Nevada-

Wyoming- Montana ...........................and/or ......................... North Dakota State (both consistent top 8 D1AA teams)

SJSU- Cal Tech ..............................and/or.............................. UC-Davis (both consistent top 16 D1AA teams)

Idaho-Utah State

NMSU- North Texas

http://www.mwcboard.com/www/forums/index.php?showtopic=11551

NDSU ranked : # 5 (2007) ............. # 2 (2006) #13 (2005) #17 (2004)

Montana ranked : # 11 (2007),....... # 4 (2006), NR (2005), #2 (2004)

UC Davis ranked : NR (2007), .........# 9 (2006), # 23 (2005), NR (2004)

Cal PolyTech ranked : NR (2007), ...# 12 (2006), # 5 (2004), # 12 (2004)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cowboy Junky

New 10 or 11 team WAC conference (assuming MWC takes Fresno and Boise and maybe Houston)

Hawaii-Nevada-

Wyoming- Montana- ......................... North Dakota State (both consistent top 8 D1AA teams)

SJSU- UC Davis or.............................. Caly Poly (both consistent top 16 D1AA teams)

Idaho-Utah State

NMSU- North Texas

If you're going to drop a team to a mythical Wac wouldn't you drop the team that never made it to the sweet 16 or won a conference football championship in the history of the Wac/MWC combined? Just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to drop a team to a mythical Wac wouldn't you drop the team that never made it to the sweet 16 or won a conference football championship in the history of the Wac/MWC combined? Just curious.

While I agree with your point that the odds are VERY slim that Wyoming (or any MWC team) would be dropped to the WAC, there is a misconception that UNM has never made it to the Sweet 16. During the Bob King era, UNM did, in fact, make it to the final 16 of the NCAA tournament. It may not have been called the "Sweet 16" back then, but it was the final 16.

And besides, I don't think Sweet 16's and conference championships would necessarily be the main considerations if a team were to be dropped from the conference. I think the main factors would be more financial/fan support based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to drop a team to a mythical Wac wouldn't you drop the team that never made it to the sweet 16 or won a conference football championship in the history of the Wac/MWC combined? Just curious.

Like I said in other posts Im just doing doing some rearranging, comic- book/superhero style. Dont take this topic too seriously. Its just interesting, thats all. This is not meant to be a flame war at all- and I know a few individuals may get defensive, but c'mon this is probably unrealistic and , on my end, its pure specualtion. Like I said, comic book style. I personally dont want Houston. I have no special feelings for them. I do howver have strong regards for Wyoming. Again, just wasting away the non football season dolldrums so to speak. Fools argue and wise people discuss, so lets discuss rather than argue.

As for your post, that is one perspective. But

A) Its not true- At the same time , what MWC teams have not made it to the sweet 16? Has AFA, CSU, BYU, WYOMING, SDSU, UNM, TCU- basically everyone except UNLV (last year?)? I dont think so.*

B) Its talking about the distant past (distant being more than a decade ago, a different conference altogether).

Today its a different animal Junky. The face of the college football world has changed , it would seem, by leaps and bounds (not better mind you, but juts controlled my money, Media, market, population more than it ever has. and that seesm to be the trajectory from here on out...)

*as for football, If you want to go back to the wac why stop there- by the way, (I believe UNM won a WAC championship in 1982 with a 10-1 record and in the early-mid 60's and late 60's early 70's -Rocky's time at UNM we did very well- and won a few conference championship though I dont know if that was the SWC or the WAC)? Go back to the 20's and see what was happening then too. Serioulsy how much does unheralded nationla history affect todays values of conference alignment? a little? none? a lot? its everything? Id say its between none and a little. BOise has no history yet they are arguably the most known non aq team on a nationla level. So i think history is something that mattered more when the game was less riddled with monetary interest. Today its everything- unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cowboy Junky

Like I said in other posts Im just doing doing some rearranging, comic- book/superhero style. Dont take this topic too seriously. Its just interesting, thats all. This is not meant to be a flame war at all- and I know a few individuals may get defensive, but c'mon this is probably unrealistic and , on my end, its pure specualtion. Like I said, comic book style. I personally dont want Houston. I have no special feelings for them. I do howver have strong regards for Wyoming. Again, just wasting away the non football season dolldrums so to speak. Fools argue and wise people discuss, so lets discuss rather than argue.

As for your post, that is one perspective. But

A) Its not true- At the same time , what MWC teams have not made it to the sweet 16? Has AFA, CSU, BYU, WYOMING, SDSU, UNM, TCU- basically everyone except UNLV (last year?)? I dont think so.*

B) Its talking about the distant past (distant being more than a decade ago, a different conference altogether).

Today its a different animal Junky. The face of the college football world has changed , it would seem, by leaps and bounds (not better mind you, but juts controlled my money, Media, market, population more than it ever has. and that seesm to be the trajectory from here on out...)

*as for football, If you want to go back to the wac why stop there- by the way, (I believe UNM won a WAC championship in 1982 with a 10-1 record and in the early-mid 60's and late 60's early 70's -Rocky's time at UNM we did very well- and won a few conference championship though I dont know if that was the SWC or the WAC)? Go back to the 20's and see what was happening then too. Serioulsy how much does unheralded nationla history affect todays values of conference alignment? a little? none? a lot? its everything? Id say its between none and a little. BOise has no history yet they are arguably the most known non aq team on a nationla level. So i think history is something that mattered more when the game was less riddled with monetary interest. Today its everything- unfortunately.

The point I'm trying to make, don't throw stones in a glass house. You guys have one of the most inept records in the history of our conference. Should I start posting links to how bad you've been?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point I'm trying to make, don't throw stones in a glass house. You guys have one of the most inept records in the history of our conference. Should I start posting links to how bad you've been?

History wise in the WAC and before- absoulutely. UNM has blown. However barring BYU (and a slight argument can be made for afa and utah and a smaller argument for Wyoming), everyone else has too- boise state didnt exist, fresno state was a penitentiary, unlv was d1aa, and csu also sucked, as did houston.

But the point is not the distant past. If it was then I wouldnt see an argument, football wise, for UNM.

But then again, to the line of thinking that covets the past, we should have the football glory leaders of the past as such: SMU, SMU, SMU...Harvard.....Stanford.....etc.

The point is that the past is important for a fan base mostly- unless the past was top notch nationla caliber than everyone knows about it. But aside from BYU, that distinction doesnt belong to anyone in the mwc or the wac. So again, im looking - COMIC book style, fantasy style pure conjecture. If you aksed my to vote I doubt I would vote for this make up as, again, I think highly of Wyoming, the state, the fans, etc and have no connection to houston, for example. intelligent (i hope :) speculation thats all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UNM, first EVER Western Athletic Conference football champion. Sure, UNM sucked big time in football for several years, but not anymore. Especially since Rocky Long returned. We've just about owned Wyoming in the last 6 years so be carefull who's house your calling glass.

Whoop te dooo, New Mexico wins a bowl game and now they rule the roost. Nice work you guys have "pretty much owned the 'boys the last 6 years" - now that's quite an accomplishment given the past few seasons they've put together. You're house is pretty much as glass as it gets. I looked up how many times that UNM was ranked in the final polls - Once, 1964 at #16!!!!!! And not to worry, the Lobos did actually reach the sweet 16 - they did it one time before it was even known as the sweet 16. Yep you have set the bar for us all to look up to. If you want to leave Wyo out of your COMIC 11 so be it but get off your New Mexico Bowl (hmmm) high horse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loboj I think more important issue is finding 8 teams for the WAC to survive. With Boise and Fresno in the MWC look for La Tech to bolt to CUSA when the big east expands. N texas wont join that league w/o Boise and Fresno. Montana wont either. Look for UC Davis and SAC st. to save it from its demise. Its too bad UTEP isnt there it could make it for sure.

quote name='LoboJ' date='Jan 25 2008, 11:53 AM' post='170431']

New 10 or 11 team WAC conference (assuming MWC takes Fresno and Boise and maybe Houston)

Hawaii-Nevada-

Wyoming- Montana ...........................and/or ......................... North Dakota State (both consistent top 8 D1AA teams)

SJSU- Cal Tech ..............................and/or.............................. UC-Davis (both consistent top 16 D1AA teams)

Idaho-Utah State

NMSU- North Texas

http://www.mwcboard.com/www/forums/index.php?showtopic=11551

NDSU ranked : # 5 (2007) ............. # 2 (2006) #13 (2005) #17 (2004)

Montana ranked : # 11 (2007),....... # 4 (2006), NR (2005), #2 (2004)

UC Davis ranked : NR (2007), .........# 9 (2006), # 23 (2005), NR (2004)

Cal PolyTech ranked : NR (2007), ...# 12 (2006), # 5 (2004), # 12 (2004)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. We've just about owned Wyoming in the last 6 years so be carefull who's house your calling glass.

And Wyoming still leads the series. I know the initial thread was kind of funny, but in reality New Mexico has nothing over either the Wyoming football or basketball programs. We've done more in each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoop te dooo, New Mexico wins a bowl game and now they rule the roost. Nice work you guys have "pretty much owned the 'boys the last 6 years" - now that's quite an accomplishment given the past few seasons they've put together. You're house is pretty much as glass as it gets. I looked up how many times that UNM was ranked in the final polls - Once, 1964 at #16!!!!!! And not to worry, the Lobos did actually reach the sweet 16 - they did it one time before it was even known as the sweet 16. Yep you have set the bar for us all to look up to. If you want to leave Wyo out of your COMIC 11 so be it but get off your New Mexico Bowl (hmmm) high horse.

Ah, cattle tender, it wasn't me who started that BS about expanding, or leaving you guys out of anything. I'm an outspoken opponent to ANY additional changes in the MWC other than adding UTEP, so you can climb down off that rocking horse anytime you feel like it. Wyoming has a more "storied" past for sure, nobody disputes that. But the past is the past and right now you're winless in conference in basketball and you finished 2-6 in football. So calm down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note, as you can see from my post count, I am new to the board in voice but have enjoyed reading it for a while. Probably just continue to read but I felt I had get my two cents in. GO POKES!!

Glad to see you post which you should do more often.

Welcome to the board it's always good to see another Poke Poster.

Maybe you could give us four cents worth next time. :D

2me1q87.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree with your point that the odds are VERY slim that Wyoming (or any MWC team) would be dropped to the WAC, there is a misconception that UNM has never made it to the Sweet 16. During the Bob King era, UNM did, in fact, make it to the final 16 of the NCAA tournament. It may not have been called the "Sweet 16" back then, but it was the final 16.

And besides, I don't think Sweet 16's and conference championships would necessarily be the main considerations if a team were to be dropped from the conference. I think the main factors would be more financial/fan support based.

How many teams were in the NCAA then? Believe you're talking about 1968 when you mention the King era. In the Pit didn't UNM lose to Santa Clara and UCLA beat the Aggies??? So NM aggies played UCLA??? This was the 1968 regional.... Who did UNM beat to get to this final 16??? I don't remember , if anyone??? Help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many teams were in the NCAA then? Believe you're talking about 1968 when you mention the King era. In the Pit didn't UNM lose to Santa Clara and UCLA beat the Aggies??? So NM aggies played UCLA??? This was the 1968 regional.... Who did UNM beat to get to this final 16??? I don't remember , if anyone??? Help

In 1968 the Tournament consisted of 23 teams

Nine teams had first round byes.

Fourteen teams had play-in games

New Mexico started in the second round with a first round bye.

So in their first game they were already placed in the round of 16 and promptly lost.

New Mexico State had a first round play in which they won but lost in their second round game.

The two teams from New Mexico met in a third place regional consolation game which New Mexico State won.

1968

Here's how that region turned out

First Round: (play in game)

New Mexico State 68

Weber State 57

Second Round:

Santa Clara 86

New Mexico 73

UCLA 58

New Mexico State 49

Regional Third: (consolation)

New Mexico State 62

New Mexico 58

Regional Final:

UCLA 87

Santa Clara 66

National Semis:

UCLA 101

Houston 69

National Championship:

UCLA 78

North Carolina 55

2me1q87.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New 10 or 11 team WAC conference (assuming MWC takes Fresno and Boise and maybe Houston)

Hawaii-Nevada-

Wyoming- Montana ...........................and/or ......................... North Dakota State (both consistent top 8 D1AA teams)

SJSU- Cal Tech ..............................and/or.............................. UC-Davis (both consistent top 16 D1AA teams)

Idaho-Utah State

NMSU- North Texas

http://www.mwcboard.com/www/forums/index.php?showtopic=11551

NDSU ranked : # 5 (2007) ............. # 2 (2006) #13 (2005) #17 (2004)

Montana ranked : # 11 (2007),....... # 4 (2006), NR (2005), #2 (2004)

UC Davis ranked : NR (2007), .........# 9 (2006), # 23 (2005), NR (2004)

Cal PolyTech ranked : NR (2007), ...# 12 (2006), # 5 (2004), # 12 (2004)

Some Lobo fans seem to be on crack cocaine lately. The dream MWC line-up should consist of schools proving themselves by ACTUALLY HAVING WON men's championships since inception, plus a few solid, regional choices. Thus, the conference moving forward should look like this:

WYO/CSU

Utah/BYU

SDSU/UNLV

AFA/TCU

BSU/FSU

That would be a solid list as the conference and the mtn jump to satellite.

The good news for UNM is that they'd still be able to go to their own bowl every year for the next 30 years!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some Lobo fans seem to be on crack cocaine lately. The dream MWC line-up should consist of schools proving themselves by ACTUALLY HAVING WON men's championships since inception, plus a few solid, regional choices. Thus, the conference moving forward should look like this:

WYO/CSU

Utah/BYU

SDSU/UNLV

AFA/TCU

BSU/FSU

That would be a solid list as the conference and the mtn jump to satellite.

The good news for UNM is that they'd still be able to go to their own bowl every year for the next 30 years!!

This topic stinks as of right now... Good Grief! Have fun comparing pecker sizes next! :angry:

"Make a mistake once and it becomes a lesson, make the same mistake twice and it becomes a choice."
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some Lobo fans seem to be on crack cocaine lately. The dream MWC line-up should consist of schools proving themselves by ACTUALLY HAVING WON men's championships since inception, plus a few solid, regional choices. Thus, the conference moving forward should look like this:

WYO/CSU

Utah/BYU

SDSU/UNLV

AFA/TCU

BSU/FSU

That would be a solid list as the conference and the mtn jump to satellite.

The good news for UNM is that they'd still be able to go to their own bowl every year for the next 30 years!!

Gheeze, cant even have a rational discussion without emotional names flying out. Yea were all on crack cocaine. Nice...

Your case dies because youre saying that the makings of a conference, the criteria of a conference, are either limited to- or ruled by- ."ACTUALLY HAVING WON men's championships since inception"

First, UNM has won confernce ch'ps in football and bball and every other sport.

Second, not every team you listed has won a conference championship .

Thrid not eveyr team has won a CURRENT conference championship (most have NOT)

Fourth, Do you think a 1978 conference championship is that important in deciding a conferenc'es make up in 2010?

Dude, Temple has won a big east championship in the past. Are you saying to throw out Louisville and bring in Temple? Of course not- your logic, your reasoning,is laughable.

Give it some thought.

...and this is a diversion from what i think are important- no vital - components in a strong bcs worthy copnference...TV sets, success (current , not in 1978), facilities, monetary and political support of athletics especially fball and bball, attendance, population, recrutiing ties (ie texas cali florida ohio), destination cities,academics, national reputation,academic reputation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gheeze, cant even have a rational discussion without emotional names flying out. Yea were all on crack cocaine. Nice...

Your case dies because youre saying that the makings of a conference, the criteria of a conference, are either limited to- or ruled by- ."ACTUALLY HAVING WON men's championships since inception"

First, UNM has won confernce ch'ps in football and bball and every other sport.

Second, not every team you listed has won a conference championship .

Thrid not eveyr team has won a CURRENT conference championship (most have NOT)

Fourth, Do you think a 1978 conference championship is that important in deciding a conferenc'es make up in 2010?

Dude, Temple has won a big east championship in the past. Are you saying to throw out Louisville and bring in Temple? Of course not- your logic, your reasoning,is laughable.

Give it some thought.

...and this is a diversion from what i think are important- no vital - components in a strong bcs worthy copnference...TV sets, success (current , not in 1978), facilities, monetary and political support of athletics especially fball and bball, attendance, population, recrutiing ties (ie texas cali florida ohio), destination cities,academics, national reputation,academic reputation

All we're asking is that UNM win a men's MWC regular season championship in something before spouting off. Pretty simple. At the very least, try posting useless smack on a weekend where your teams won't embarrass themselves. Ouch.

Wyoming is pouring tens of millions of dollars into facilities, Einstein. Next time your Lobos play at the WAR, we invite your usual tiny contingent of fans to tour the Cowboy IPF. They'll come away wondering how Wyoming got so much more bang for the buck than what's sitting in Albuquerque.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...