Jump to content
Bruininthebay

American Athletic and ESPN do not reach agreement during exclusive negotiations for new TV deal

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

Why not just have the entire Mountain West as a football only conference with the West division schools in the Big West and the Mountain division schools in the Big Sky?

Each conference would play a single round for most olympic sports season, although you'd probably want to add home and home series for the rivalries

 

You cant do that.  An FBS "football only" league is not permitted by the NCAA.  Under current rules, at least 8 teams would have to stay in the MW football conference in all sports in order to sponsor FBS football.    An FBS football league can have football only members---but they must have at least 8 FBS members that play olympic sports together in order to sponsor the FBS league.  What you COULD do is move 8 teams to the Big West and 4 to the Big Sky--and then have the Big West sponsor a FBS league (which would have 4 "football only" members from the Big Sky).  You could potentially do the same thing with the WAC as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ten Commandments of Mountain West Conference Composition

1. King Craig runs things

2. As such, no realignment of the conference will occur which might reduce the King's salary

3-10. See Commandment 1 and Commandment 2

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CaffeinatedCoog said:

 

You cant do that.  An FBS "football only" league is not permitted by the NCAA.  Under current rules, at least 8 teams would have to stay in the MW football conference in all sports in order to sponsor FBS football.    An FBS football league can have football only members---but they must have at least 8 FBS members that play olympic sports together in order to sponsor the FBS league.  What you COULD do is move 8 teams to the Big West and 4 to the Big Sky--and then have the Big West sponsor a FBS league (which would have 4 "football only" members from the Big Sky).  You could potentially do the same thing with the WAC as well.  

 

Correct.  The NCAA allows for an FCS football only league - think MVFC and the non scholarship Pioneer - but allowing for such an FBS league would solve some problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I think it's more likely that SDSU and Fresno State would join the AAC for football only and the Big West for Olys.

By doing so we would raise our national visibility in football while saving a bunch on travel expenses for our Olys and gain Tier 3 broadcast rights which would neutralize the pittance made from MWC membership.

Boise with its great recruiting classes can remain in the MWC and bleed everybody else dry.

 

What do ya do about UCSD and Cal State Bakersfield?  It becomes a helluva lot harder to drop them once they join in 2020. I honestly cannot imagine you guys being okay with sharing a league with those two.

 So in your return to the BW scenario your "new" league would now has 13 members, 12 in California.  Any chance you can pry Nevada loose to at least bring back another school outside CA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jdgaucho said:

 

What do ya do about UCSD and Cal State Bakersfield?  It becomes a helluva lot harder to drop them once they join in 2020. I honestly cannot imagine you guys being okay with sharing a league with those two.

 So in your return to the BW scenario your "new" league would now has 13 members, 12 in California.  Any chance you can pry Nevada loose to at least bring back another school outside CA?

For the record---I was just pointing out what is and is not possible under the rules.  I dont see how any of these other Big West/Big Sky/Football only configurations place any of the current MW members in a better situation.  Seems to me the MW is better league as is.    

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ESPN decides to pick UCF @ Houston for College Gameday this Sat 3/2...that can't be coincidence. I bet word of our new deal comes out Fri eve or Sat AM to coincide with College Gameday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jdgaucho said:

What do ya do about UCSD and Cal State Bakersfield?  It becomes a helluva lot harder to drop them once they join in 2020. I honestly cannot imagine you guys being okay with sharing a league with those two.

 So in your return to the BW scenario your "new" league would now has 13 members, 12 in California.  Any chance you can pry Nevada loose to at least bring back another school outside CA?

CSUB's campus might look like a community college but they have a decent basketball program which is located in a county of almost a million people which contains no other university and CSUB isn't exactly known for being a school for sports-ignoring intellectuals. Adding CSUB to the Big West therefore makes some sense. However, UCSD has absolutely no basketball heritage and it's located within 30 minutes of two other schools which play major college hoops and I've been assured that UCSD is no different than it was when I attended SDSU in being a school of intellectual nerds who don't give a rat's ass about sports. It is therefore a HORRIBLE addition to the Big West. Wanna know how UCSD will performance as a member of the conference? Think UCR or CSUN. Strike that, think UCR only. Even CSUN occasionally accomplishes something athletically.

Without looking, I honestly can't think of a Big West member located outside California. That school must be a real powerhouse too.

If the Nevada schools had any interest in joining the Big West, you know your conference would jump at the chance to get them regardless of what the UCs might think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

CSUB's campus might look like a community college but they have a decent basketball program which is located in a county of almost a million people which contains no other university and CSUB isn't exactly known for being a school for sports-ignoring intellectuals. Adding CSUB to the Big West therefore makes some sense. However, UCSD has absolutely no basketball heritage and it's located within 30 minutes of two other schools which play major college hoops and I've been assured that UCSD is no different than it was when I attended SDSU in being a school of intellectual nerds who don't give a rat's ass about sports. It is therefore a HORRIBLE addition to the Big West. Wanna know how UCSD will performance as a member of the conference? Think UCR or CSUN. Strike that, think UCR only. Even CSUN occasionally accomplishes something athletically.

Without looking, I honestly can't think of a Big West member located outside California. That school must be a real powerhouse too.

If the Nevada schools had any interest in joining the Big West, you know your conference would jump at the chance to get them regardless of what the UCs might think.

 

While nobody is calling Hawaii a powerhouse, they're decent enough to move the needle.  I am adamant that a 2nd non-CA member is needed.

Your two cents about UCSD's potential is duly noted.  But would you and other SDSU fans and alums be cool sharing a conference with them?  Would President De La Torre or J.D. Wicker have any issues? That is what I'm curious about.

Because again, in your hypothetical Aztec Football to the AAC scenario you and Fresno are rejoining a BW with a Central Valley and San Diego school already in the conference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jdgaucho said:

 

While nobody is calling Hawaii a powerhouse, they're decent enough to move the needle.  I am adamant that a 2nd non-CA member is needed.

Your two cents about UCSD's potential is duly noted.  But would you and other SDSU fans and alums be cool sharing a conference with them?  Would President De La Torre or J.D. Wicker have any issues? That is what I'm curious about.

Because again, in your hypothetical Aztec Football to the AAC scenario you and Fresno are rejoining a BW with a Central Valley and San Diego school already in the conference.  

I hardly ever hear anything about any Big West schools.  I think it's because the conference is so California-centric.

Honestly, I find the WAC more interesting.   Schools in Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, California.   The only real dog in that conference is Chicago State.  I'm not sure what to think about Rio Grande Valley, though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jdgaucho said:

While nobody is calling Hawaii a powerhouse, they're decent enough to move the needle.  I am adamant that a 2nd non-CA member is needed.

Your two cents about UCSD's potential is duly noted.  But would you and other SDSU fans and alums be cool sharing a conference with them?  Would President De La Torre or J.D. Wicker have any issues? That is what I'm curious about.

Because again, in your hypothetical Aztec Football to the AAC scenario you and Fresno are rejoining a BW with a Central Valley and San Diego school already in the conference.  

The extent to which I pay attention to the BWC is exemplified by the fact it didn't even occur to me that Hawaii was a member.

As to what conference SDSU might try to put its Olys in if it joined the AAC for football, what difference should it make to SDSU and Fresno State whether there are already proximate schools? Other than the Big East, no conference which doesn't play football actually earns money. So we wouldn't be joining the BWC to MAKE money, we would be doing so to SAVE money, as in travel expenses. Really, that's all the BWC has over the WAC as a landing spot.

And has it occurred to you that if SDSU, Fresno, UNLV and UNR were to join the WAC that it's quite possible Hawaii would leave the BWC for the WAC? I'll bet Hawaii would do so in a heartbeat since in that scenario, their travel expenses really wouldn't be any greater and might actually be less given that flights to major cities are always considerably less expensive than into little burgs like Santa Barbara. And if the WAC was to add those five schools, it might actually have a shot at getting two schools into the NCAAs on occasion whereas the BWC has no such chance.

Sorry but the BWC is all about playing baseball and running a conference on the cheap and as long as the UCs keep demanding to have the same number of members as the CSU schools, that will never change because other than for UCLA and Cal, with the UC schools, sports basically don't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

The extent to which I pay attention to the BWC is exemplified by the fact it didn't even occur to me that Hawaii was a member.

As to what conference SDSU might try to put its Olys in if it joined the AAC for football, what difference should it make to SDSU and Fresno State whether there are already proximate schools? Other than the Big East, no conference which doesn't play football actually earns money. So we wouldn't be joining the BWC to MAKE money, we would be doing so to SAVE money, as in travel expenses. Really, that's all the BWC has over the WAC as a landing spot.

And has it occurred to you that if SDSU, Fresno, UNLV and UNR were to join the WAC that it's quite possible Hawaii would leave the BWC for the WAC? I'll bet Hawaii would do so in a heartbeat since in that scenario, their travel expenses really wouldn't be any greater and might actually be less given that flights to major cities are always considerably less expensive than into little burgs like Santa Barbara. And if the WAC was to add those five schools, it might actually have a shot at getting two schools into the NCAAs on occasion whereas the BWC has no such chance.

Sorry but the BWC is all about playing baseball and running a conference on the cheap and as long as the UCs keep demanding to have the same number of members as the CSU schools, that will never change because other than for UCLA and Cal, with the UC schools, sports basically don't matter.

I wonder if some of the MWC schools have considered essentially trying a hostile takeover of the WAC? If BYU was onboard it would only take 6 football playing schools to jump to the WAC to give them the 8 needed to have a FBS conference. SDSU, Fresno, UNR, UNLV, and Hawaii is 5; so one more and you could do it. Could be Boise, could be a mountain school, could be a CUSA school (UTEP?). It would give the WAC 15 all sports members, but Seattle or GCU (or maybe both) would almost certainly be headed to the WCC to replace BYU, so you would have at the most 14 schools, which is manageable. Get a TV deal that allows you to keep your tier 3 rights (which would be more valuable with 5 OOC games) and that is arguably a better all around situation for SDSU then what you guys have currently.

It would be like founding a new conference without actually having to start from scratch and found a new conference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

I wonder if some of the MWC schools have considered essentially trying a hostile takeover of the WAC? If BYU was onboard it would only take 6 football playing schools to jump to the WAC to give them the 8 needed to have a FBS conference. SDSU, Fresno, UNR, UNLV, and Hawaii is 5; so one more and you could do it. Could be Boise, could be a mountain school, could be a CUSA school (UTEP?). It would give the WAC 15 all sports members, but Seattle or GCU (or maybe both) would almost certainly be headed to the WCC to replace BYU, so you would have at the most 14 schools, which is manageable. Get a TV deal that allows you to keep your tier 3 rights (which would be more valuable with 5 OOC games) and that is arguably a better all around situation for SDSU then what you guys have currently.

It would be like founding a new conference without actually having to start from scratch and found a new conference. 

BYU isn't going to join the WAC and be in a conference with 2 other Utah schools: UVU and Dixie.  BYU also won't be a part of destroying the WAC because of those 2 schools. 

Possibly more likely is that SDSU and Boise could form a new conference out of a few WAC members, plus Hawaii.

1.  SDSU (AAC)

2.  Boise (AAC)

3.  Hawaii (MWC)

4.  Grand Canyon

5.  NMSU

6.  Seattle

7.  Denver

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

as the UCs keep demanding to have the same number of members as the CSU schools, that will never change because other than for UCLA and Cal, with the UC schools, sports basically don't matter.

on this particular point, I disagree that there has ever been a statement like that beyond the opinion of @jdgaucho .  His theory isn't impossible but doesn't take into account that with respect to membership decisions the Big West bylaws requires either 2.3s or 3/4s (I believe a supermajority is the case for the Pac 12, MW, and most NCAA conferences.  The UC has no reason to worry about being able to exercise a veto given that there are currently four and soon there will be five members of the Big West so they will constitute more than a 1/3s of the voting members.

Somehow the Big West internet seized on the vote against CSU Bakersfield and then UCSD into an idea that 'insists on equality' because Big West fans spend a lot of time complaining about  Title IX - it's their thing.

My understanding is that a series of votes took place.  First, there was a Big West conference decision not to admit CSU Bakersfield.  My impression was that the UC's essentially indicated they were going to vote against the Roadrunners (in an example of UC administrators acting typically elitist) or actually did vote against Bako at an annual meeting; either way academic administrators were being a bunch of pricks.  The following year when UCSD brought their application without reaching out to Cal State Bakersfield, the Cal State administrators voted in a block against offering UCSD a membership initially because f- that arrogance.

It is a huge leap to make a single instance of sticking up for a fellow Cal State campus that was unjustifiably dissed into a perceptual decision by the Big West conference to have an equal proportion of Cal State and UC campuses.

Eventually the Big West agreed to admit both CSU Bakersfield and UCSD  at the same time.  Hopefully it means that UC won't act in an elitist way going forward but it could happen again (I don't support that).  It is also difficult to imagine the Big West expanding without admitting more Cal State campuses simply because there are 23 campuses of CSU while there are only 9 UCs.  Limiting the Cal State system to only having a minority of it's campuses in NCAA Division I while UC has the majority at that level is an impossible position to defend, which UC essentially had to concede when voting to admit the Roadrunners.

If Sacramento State can get a 5,000 to 8,000 seat on campus arena, I doubt any member of the Big West would vote against their admission despite that leading to six CSU campuses and five UC campuses.  Nor would the Big West refuse to admit SJSU in the event the Spartans are made to do "a Humboldt state" by the Cal State University Chancellor either. 

The Big West would happily readmit any and/or all of the three current MW members that are Cal State campuses and not worry about having exactly equal numbers of UC or CSU campuses.  UC will want to get UC Merced in eventually - possibly UCSC now that they play in the G League Warriors building downtown.

Finally, Portland State did a really nice upgrade of their gym.  I believe it is by far the best in the Big Sky so they may be looking to join the Big West too.  If UCSB could revive its football program at the FCS level, the Big West could revive its FCS football division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

BYU isn't going to join the WAC and be in a conference with 2 other Utah schools: UVU and Dixie.  BYU also won't be a part of destroying the WAC because of those 2 schools. 

Possibly more likely is that SDSU and Boise could form a new conference out of a few WAC members, plus Hawaii.

1.  SDSU (AAC)

2.  Boise (AAC)

3.  Hawaii (MWC)

4.  Grand Canyon

5.  NMSU

6.  Seattle

7.  Denver

 

K, then replace BYU with Boise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

The extent to which I pay attention to the BWC is exemplified by the fact it didn't even occur to me that Hawaii was a member.

As to what conference SDSU might try to put its Olys in if it joined the AAC for football, what difference should it make to SDSU and Fresno State whether there are already proximate schools? Other than the Big East, no conference which doesn't play football actually earns money. So we wouldn't be joining the BWC to MAKE money, we would be doing so to SAVE money, as in travel expenses. Really, that's all the BWC has over the WAC as a landing spot.

And has it occurred to you that if SDSU, Fresno, UNLV and UNR were to join the WAC that it's quite possible Hawaii would leave the BWC for the WAC? I'll bet Hawaii would do so in a heartbeat since in that scenario, their travel expenses really wouldn't be any greater and might actually be less given that flights to major cities are always considerably less expensive than into little burgs like Santa Barbara. And if the WAC was to add those five schools, it might actually have a shot at getting two schools into the NCAAs on occasion whereas the BWC has no such chance.

Sorry but the BWC is all about playing baseball and running a conference on the cheap and as long as the UCs keep demanding to have the same number of members as the CSU schools, that will never change because other than for UCLA and Cal, with the UC schools, sports basically don't matter.

 

The thought hasn't occurred to me that you can put your sports in the WAC.  I don't believe you would though. 

SDSU, Fresno, UNLV, Hawaii and UNR with Grand Canyon, Cal Baptist, UMKC, Utah Valley, Dixie State, Seattle, UT-RGV, Chicago State and NMSU.  Talk about a wild hodge podge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

on this particular point, I disagree that there has ever been a statement like that beyond the opinion of @jdgaucho .  His theory isn't impossible but doesn't take into account that with respect to membership decisions the Big West bylaws requires either 2.3s or 3/4s (I believe a supermajority is the case for the Pac 12, MW, and most NCAA conferences.  The UC has no reason to worry about being able to exercise a veto given that there are currently four and soon there will be five members of the Big West so they will constitute more than a 1/3s of the voting members.

Somehow the Big West internet seized on the vote against UCSD into an idea that 'insists on equality' because Big West fans spend a lot of time complaining about  Title IX - it's their thing.

My understanding is that a series of votes took place.  First, there was a Big West conference decision not to admit CSU Bakersfield.  My impression was that the UC's essentially indicated they were going to vote against the Roadrunners (in an example of UC administrators acting typically elitist) or actually did vote against Bako at an annual meeting; either way academic administrators were being a bunch of pricks.  The following year when UCSD brought their application without reaching out to Cal State Bakersfield, the Cal State administrators voted in a block against offering UCSD a membership initially because f- that arrogance.

It is a huge leap to make a single instance of sticking up for a fellow Cal State campus that was unjustifiably dissed into a perceptual decision by the Big West conference have an equal proportion of Cal State and UC campuses.

Eventually the Big West agreed to admit both CSU Bakersfield and  at the same time.  Hopefully it means that UC won't act in an elitist way.  It is also impossible to imagine the Big West expanding without admitting more Cal State campuses simply because there are 23 campuses of CSU while there are only 9 UCs.  Limiting the Cal State system to only having a minority of it's campuses in NCAA Division I while UC has the majority at that level is an impossible position to defend, which UC essentially had to concede when voting to admit the Roadrunners.

If Sacramento State can get a 5,000 to 8,000 seat on campus arena, I doubt any member of the Big West would vote against their admission despite that leading to six CSU campuses and five UC campuses.  Nor would the Big West refuse to admit SJSU in the event the Spartans are made to do "a Humboldt state" by the Cal State University Chancellor either. 

The Big West would happily readmit any and/or all of the three current MW members that are Cal State campuses and not worry about having exactly equal numbers of UC or CSU campuses.  UC will want to get UC Merced in eventually - possibly UCSC now that they play in the G League Warriors building downtown.

Finally, Portland State did a really nice upgrade of their gym.  I believe it is by far the best in the Big Sky so they may be looking to join the Big West too.  If UCSB could revive its football program at the FCS level, the Big West could revive its FCS football division.

How were the Bakersfield Birds "Unjustifiably dissed?" Everyone agreed the 2010-2012 additions of Hawaii, SDSU and Boise were good decisions even if the latter two ultimately backed out - much to the relief of CSUB, Hair and the MW.  Without that change of heart, Bakersfield and UCSD would have been stuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SalinasSpartan said:

I wonder if some of the MWC schools have considered essentially trying a hostile takeover of the WAC? If BYU was onboard it would only take 6 football playing schools to jump to the WAC to give them the 8 needed to have a FBS conference. SDSU, Fresno, UNR, UNLV, and Hawaii is 5; so one more and you could do it. Could be Boise, could be a mountain school, could be a CUSA school (UTEP?). It would give the WAC 15 all sports members, but Seattle or GCU (or maybe both) would almost certainly be headed to the WCC to replace BYU, so you would have at the most 14 schools, which is manageable. Get a TV deal that allows you to keep your tier 3 rights (which would be more valuable with 5 OOC games) and that is arguably a better all around situation for SDSU then what you guys have currently.

It would be like founding a new conference without actually having to start from scratch and found a new conference. 

 

If SJSU is part of that hostile takeover you don't need a Boise or C-USA member.  The entire MW western division + NMSU + BYU  = 8 FBS teams 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jdgaucho said:

 

If SJSU is part of that hostile takeover you don't need a Boise or C-USA member.  The entire MW western division + NMSU + BYU  = 8 FBS teams 

True, but for those schools SJSU would probably be a last resort. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jdgaucho said:

How were the Bakersfield Birds "Unjustifiably dissed?" Everyone agreed the 2010-2012 additions of Hawaii, SDSU and Boise were good decisions even if the latter two ultimately backed out - much to the relief of CSUB, Hair and the MW.  Without that change of heart, Bakersfield and UCSD would have been stuck.

In comparison to UCSD, Bako had to do more to demonstrate their  worthiness for admission.  I don't think that UCSD's current athletic program is as good as Bakersfield ten years ago.

https://www.bakersfield.com/sports/big-west-passes-on-csub-invites-hawaii-instead/article_153666ad-8c2e-592e-aa3b-4bfa7715f528.html

The Big West Conference has spoken, and the answer is "no" to Cal State Bakersfield's bid for membership.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×