Jump to content

Archived

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

JuwanHWolv

What's The Ideal # For Conference Membership? Is it 8?

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, JuwanHWolv said:

Many have seen both sides of the coin with the 16-team WAC & the 8-team MWC.. What was demonstrated by the experiment is that bigger is not always better.

Those 8 old WAC teams became more valuable when they changed their name by eliminating the excess, imo. The rebrand transcended the WAC and it improved the conference's chances at the BCS games.

 So what is the optimum number?

IMO, 8 is still the optimum. If the AAC is successful in getting to play a CCG with 11 teams - by arguing to let conferences choose how to select their champion on their own, I think that invariably puts 8 team configuarations back on the table. I think the unintended consequence of Aresco pushing for a change to the rule will lead to the split of Conference USA (if he succeeds in doing it)

How does that impact the MWC?

Well... The only team with the pull to lead the charge to 8 is Boise. They are essentially in the same position BYU was when the MWC was formed. As we have historically seen, a smaller conference would yield more revenue... However, Craig Thompson has given Boise State their own deal, which essentially gives them even more reasons to keep the current structure together. So, in essence, Thompson gave his version of the MWC stability by cutting the deal with Boise State (which keeps SDSU, Fresno, UNLV, etc, in check).

They say those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and I think Thompson learned. Thompson has a lot of political capital over the very top of the MWC & the very bottom... the middle have nowhere to go.

This would destroy basketball in the MWC. For Boise and a few others that would not matter but for many it is an important consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nine teams would be the best solution.  Nine games seem a bit much for conference games.  You get an even four home & away games.  You could also eliminate one football game a year do there are no 6-6 records in college football.

I'd love for the old Big 8 to get together and perhaps CSU is that 9th team.

I am also hoping streaming makes those media rights deals irrelevant too.  Those deals have ruined college football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2019 at 6:27 PM, Headbutt said:

I'm beginning to be a believer in an "independent conference".  Eight or ten teams with no conference affiliation that fill their schedule with each other and a few marquee games.  I could absolutely see AFA and Hawaii in that mix.  Hawaii is already almost an indy in FB.  A member of the MWC with their own separate media deal and unhappy about travel subs.  I think they could do better financially by negotiating each individual game with the full pool of 130 FBS teams than a standard agreement with the MWC.  AFA is a no-brainer.  They would always have traditional rivalries from their years in the MWC/WAC to fill their schedule but would also have the easiest time of any indy not named Notre Dame to pick and choose from the entire FBS who they're going to play.  I'd bet that AFA would make a lot more money as an indy than they do as a MWC member.

Hell, who knows.  Conferences may become a thing of the past altogether in a few years.  It seems unlikely, but in fact the only things still holding conferences together are TV deals and tradition.  Tradition has gone to hell in college football, and streaming may make TV deals obsolete.  We could all be indy in 10 years.  Except for FCS, that's more old school football and I don't think that's going to change for a very long time.

If there were no conferences, FBS would be one big blob of scheduling chaos. It’s already hard enough for some schools to get their OOC games and make them work in their schedule. 

It would take a full time group of new staff to deal with the chaos and getting what they needed, and it would be unfair to G5’s with tight budgets to have to spend money on new staff.

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nevada Convert said:

If there were no conferences, FBS would be one big blob of scheduling chaos. It’s already hard enough for some schools to schedule their OOC’s. 

I said it was unlikely, but we do have to recognize it as possible.  The landscape for college football is changing fast and none of us knows where it will end up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any number between 8 & 12 is good.  Anything above that ensures massive gaps between cycling through divisional conference mates which makes rivalry difficult. As with anything, it's not the number of conference members per se, it's the quality of those members.

24570143_BSUBACKGROUNDBANNERANDY1AWELCOME.png.5fa1e131a0fec4c26c0be2f4d0a420eb.png

망치를 가진 남자에게는, 모든것이 못처럼 보인다.

원숭이도 나무에서 떨어진다.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 is the best.  Round robin in football with equal numbers of home and away games in conference.  8 conference games means each team will average one/half fewer in-conference losses than a conference playing 9 conference games. 4 non-conference games provides for good variety and flexibility on scheduling needs - the top teams in the conference can schedule those games more aggressively for playoff/NY6 consideration; the weaker teams can schedule more for guaranteed wins and bowl eligibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the AAC board there's a thread that sites an article addressing MWC Contraction...

There seems to be smoke.

 

"Interesting article that talks about how many in the conference arent happy with bottom dweller San Jose State and that removal of both them and Hawaii could help reduce costs and make the conference better.

The weird part is, their commissioner admitted that contraction could happen. Thats not a normal step for a commissioner... and I think it points to bigger issues over there and a possible sign as to why they haven't signed a deal after negotiating for over 3 months."

 

https://www.csnbbs.com/thread-879939.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JuwanHWolv said:


The weird part is, their commissioner admitted that contraction could happen. Thats not a normal step for a commissioner...

Not what he said.  The smoke is coming out of the poster's ass....

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got no problem with any MWC school and wish there were a way that Hawai'i could be all-sports.

That said, if we had to rank the schools we'd like to be associated with, I'd vote like this:

T-1 Colorado St

T-1 Wyoming

3 New Mexico

4 Air Force

5 Reno

6 Boazy

7 Vegas

8 Fresno

9 San Jose

10 Hawai'i

11 San Diego

You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2019 at 11:16 AM, Rebels2k3 said:

8 or 12.

 

12 works as long as everyone is on the same page.

8 is too risky.  You're only at the (currently) bare minimum to operate as a full FBS conference and just one defection away from being at the minimum for a hoops auto bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2019 at 6:28 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

I think 10 is the ideal number. Let’s you do a full round robin in both football and basketball and have a CCG game. 

 

10 is great too.

It's all about being on the same page.

The lower the number, it's easier to control the metrics in FB and MBB. In no other time in history has "bottom feeders" killed so many post-season hopes in the money sports.

That's why conference realignment buoys teams when they change affiliations and cut ties to bottom feeders.

When BYU left the WAC and renamed themselves the MWC, they commanded more money (even though they were a WAC team) because the WAC took on so many RPI dregs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

The ocean is pretty good too.

Yep, done that.  Fun, but nothing near like mountain fishing.  Two different worlds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Headbutt said:

Yep, done that.  Fun, but nothing near like mountain fishing.  Two different worlds.

I don't disagree, fly fishing the Smokies or the Plateau is my zen time here in East Tennessee.  You can't beat the variety of the ocean though.

I've heard that Montana is where western fishing is at, interested in your take on Wyoming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2019 at 6:06 PM, USU78 said:

I've got no problem with any MWC school and wish there were a way that Hawai'i could be all-sports.

That said, if we had to rank the schools we'd like to be associated with, I'd vote like this:

T-1 Colorado St

T-1 Wyoming

3 New Mexico

4 Air Force

5 Reno

6 Boazy

7 Vegas

8 Fresno

9 San Jose

10 Hawai'i

11 San Diego

I'm curious why you'd have SDSU so low, is there some animosity between them and USU? They seem like the highest potential team in the conference to me, thought that would put them toward the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

I'm curious why you'd have SDSU so low, is there some animosity between them and USU? They seem like the highest potential team in the conference to me, thought that would put them toward the top.

Because they whoop our ass in football everytime we play them. Also culturally Utahans seem to not love Southern California in general. I like being associated with SDSU, personally. 

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

On 8/6/2019 at 12:53 PM, madmartigan said:

Because they whoop our ass in football everytime we play them. Also culturally Utahans seem to not love Southern California in general. I like being associated with SDSU, personally. 

 

When all is said and done, the MWC 4.0 will include all of the Utah schools, including Dixie State and... BYU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2019 at 10:48 AM, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

I'm curious why you'd have SDSU so low, is there some animosity between them and USU? They seem like the highest potential team in the conference to me, thought that would put them toward the top.

For whatever reason it's been well established that California schools don't draw well in Logan.  During the PCAA/BWC days, we didn't even draw well for SJS or Fresno when they were actually pretty good.  And forget Pacific, Long Beach, and Fullerton.  The only reason I chose Fresno over San Diego CalStates was that we've played the Fresnecks more frequently over the years and fairly evenly.

You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...