Raz Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 Jon Wilner concluded his weekly "Mail Bag" with the following: There are at least two plausible tracks for the Beavers and Cougars: — They could enter the Mountain West next summer in a standard expansion move, just as Washington and Oregon are entering the Big Ten, and shutter the Pac-12 forever. — They could attempt to preserve the Pac-12 brand and retain the assets. In that scenario, the 12 Mountain West schools could vote to dissolve their league, thereby eliminating departure penalties, and join the Pac-12 en masse. “No brand in the Group of Five has the value of the Pac-12 brand,’’ the industry source said. “If you have the brand, you own the history.” The brand, the history, the assets and voting control — everything is on hold until the Pac-12 provides the Cougars and Beavers with the critical information they requested a month ago but is only “trickling in.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorTyme Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 I agree with most of the folks here that UTEP should be in consideration if we expand. UTSA (AAC) should be the #1 target for expansion and then any of the following would be great expansion targets: UTEP (Conference USA) North Texas (AAC) Texas State (Sun Belt) Gonzaga for Non-Football, if Hawaii stays and Football Member Only in the new PACX. The compliant use to be it's too expensive to travel to Hawaii. But now nobody is thinking about the $10-$12 Million double or even triple pay raise per school. I think that dynamic might will change and disappearing travel subs and full membership might be on the table. Like Memphis, Tulane and USF but they are future targets for the ACC when Florida State, Clemson or whoever leaves the ACC. The travel might be a too far but I can see Memphis in the ACC, that is a great program and fits in the ACC. Tulane and USF do fit the ACC geographically but don't have the basketball program like Memphis. If we don't expand, I'm good with that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteedLaw Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 4:43 AM, WarriorTyme said: I agree with most of the folks here that UTEP should be in consideration if we expand. UTSA (AAC) should be the #1 target for expansion and then any of the following would be great expansion targets: UTEP (Conference USA) North Texas (AAC) Texas State (Sun Belt) Gonzaga for Non-Football, if Hawaii stays and Football Member Only in the new PACX. The compliant use to be it's too expensive to travel to Hawaii. But now nobody is thinking about the $10-$12 Million double or even triple pay raise per school. I think that dynamic might will change and disappearing travel subs and full membership might be on the table. Like Memphis, Tulane and USF but they are future targets for the ACC when Florida State, Clemson or whoever leaves the ACC. The travel might be a too far but I can see Memphis in the ACC, that is a great program and fits in the ACC. Tulane and USF do fit the ACC geographically but don't have the basketball program like Memphis. If we don't expand, I'm good with that as well. Priority number one should be to finalize the reverse merger. Sounds like King George may be up to his antics again, this time in trying to drag his feet and stall the merger. W/OSU need to remove him if needs be and appoint an interim commissioner to get the deal done. Priority number two should be to use that momentum to add schools in Texas. And, honestly, I don’t see a problem going after more than two. A 17 football team conference works if there are no divisions. Add Texas State, UTSA and UTEP. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akkula Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 I honestly don't "get" the idea of adding UTSA, UTEP, North Texas, Texas State, etc. I see no Boise State, TCU, WSU, OSU, in this group. Which one of these teams isn't going to be there in five years? Who is offering us a big chunk of money to take them? We shouldn't be adding schools just to have additional "warm bodies." 14 members if we add WSU and OSU is plenty. We could lose a few members and still have plenty of schools to form a conference. Does anybody really feel like we are in danger of being raided and decimated by the ACC or Big 12? Maybe they could take 1-2 teams but I can't see much more. Those conferences are already to big. Plus, if we add Texas schools those are probably more likely to get caught up in Eastern expansion. I could honestly see a scenario where some schools decide that being part of a superconference where the "Yankees" are so far in front of everyone, isn't any fun any longer. I could also see the Big12 and ACC being picked apart. If our new conference can get access to the playoff and our champion has an easier path, I am not sure that isn't more appealing. I could see us offering a real solid value for schools like Colorado, Arizona, ASU, Utah, BYU in our league. It is not out of the realm of possibility that the Big 12 could implode. If you slide those guys over into our new league, we are stronger than the Big 12 AND more regional. Just say no to "warm body" expansion. Nobody expected the current opportunity and we don't want such a bloated league we can't take advantage of future opportunities. 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happycamper Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 2:23 AM, OzzyOzz said: Here's the cliffs: People are stupid. don't put up with that shit. the proper response is "bro this is mwcboard. if you want vacuous 5 word posts, go to twitter" 3 Quote Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteedLaw Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 7:14 AM, Akkula said: Does anybody really feel like we are in danger of being raided and decimated by the ACC or Big 12? Decimated? No. But potentially raided by the Big XII? Yes. Yormark is not going to stop long-term at 16 teams. IMHO, 16-18 teams should be the goal for 2024 and beyond. And, Nevarez has already stated that 16 teams is the ideal goal. The top 6 conferences will send their champion to the CFP. (There is at least some talk that might drop to the top 5.) With the reverse merger, we would be the “5th best” at present. Aresco is going to try to do all he can to change that. It would be wise to try to add a team or two in Texas — especially if those schools agree to a reduced payout over a period of years — or even little to no payout until the contracts are renegotiated. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyobraska Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 4:39 AM, Raz said: Jon Wilner concluded his weekly "Mail Bag" with the following: There are at least two plausible tracks for the Beavers and Cougars: — They could enter the Mountain West next summer in a standard expansion move, just as Washington and Oregon are entering the Big Ten, and shutter the Pac-12 forever. — They could attempt to preserve the Pac-12 brand and retain the assets. In that scenario, the 12 Mountain West schools could vote to dissolve their league, thereby eliminating departure penalties, and join the Pac-12 en masse. “No brand in the Group of Five has the value of the Pac-12 brand,’’ the industry source said. “If you have the brand, you own the history.” The brand, the history, the assets and voting control — everything is on hold until the Pac-12 provides the Cougars and Beavers with the critical information they requested a month ago but is only “trickling in.” Welcome to several weeks ago Wilner. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlobo09 Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 7:27 AM, SteedLaw said: Decimated? No. But potentially raided by the Big XII? Yes. Yormark is not going to stop long-term at 16 teams. IMHO, 16-18 teams should be the goal for 2024 and beyond. And, Nevarez has already stated that 16 teams is the ideal goal. The top 6 conferences will send their champion to the CFP. (There is at least some talk that might drop to the top 5.) With the reverse merger, we would be the “5th best” at present. Aresco is going to try to do all he can to change that. It would be wise to try to add a team or two in Texas — especially if those schools agree to a reduced payout over a period of years — or even little to no payout until the contracts are renegotiated. The Big 12 is done unless the ACC implodes and they can grab 2 teams on the East Coast. If the Big 12 wanted to expand past 16 OSU would be in the Big 12. Contractually ESPN is only obligated to do a pro-rata up to 16 teams. They do not need to expand with MWC teams now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteedLaw Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 7:49 AM, jlobo09 said: The Big 12 is done unless the ACC implodes and they can grab 2 teams on the East Coast. If the Big 12 wanted to expand past 16 OSU would be in the Big 12. Contractually ESPN is only obligated to do a pro-rata up to 16 teams. They do not need to expand with MWC teams now. You expand to 16 teams to solidify your permanent auto bid to the CFP, not to avoid poaching. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparkysDad Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 7:27 AM, SteedLaw said: Decimated? No. But potentially raided by the Big XII? Yes. Yormark is not going to stop long-term at 16 teams. ...And, Nevarez has already stated that 16 teams is the ideal goal. Don't think the Big XII is looking in the MWC or the reverse-merged new Pac direction. If Yormark is that hungry, he could instantly have OSU/Wazzu or SDSU or Fresno or insert your team's name here unless it's UNLV. I think the Big Boys (SEC, Big 10 and not-at-their-level-but-the-next-most-powerful Big XII) will wait to see what's going on with the ACC and potentially Notre Dame for much more valuable expansion targets. JMHO, but the MWC and Pac 2 have short term stability (until the ACC gets out of the GOR) working in their favor to do things in stages. First priority: reverse merge with the NW Twins and current MWC members; second priority: get as much as possible for media rights; third priority: everything else. The only thing I've seen contrary to my opinion is Gloria's "16 is ideal" quote. Don't know the timing of her statement, but was it before Calfurd left? That timing would matter if so. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalsean Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 7:14 AM, Akkula said: I honestly don't "get" the idea of adding UTSA, UTEP, North Texas, Texas State, etc. I see no Boise State, TCU, WSU, OSU, in this group. Which one of these teams isn't going to be there in five years? Who is offering us a big chunk of money to take them? We shouldn't be adding schools just to have additional "warm bodies." 14 members if we add WSU and OSU is plenty. We could lose a few members and still have plenty of schools to form a conference. Does anybody really feel like we are in danger of being raided and decimated by the ACC or Big 12? Maybe they could take 1-2 teams but I can't see much more. Those conferences are already to big. Plus, if we add Texas schools those are probably more likely to get caught up in Eastern expansion. I could honestly see a scenario where some schools decide that being part of a superconference where the "Yankees" are so far in front of everyone, isn't any fun any longer. I could also see the Big12 and ACC being picked apart. If our new conference can get access to the playoff and our champion has an easier path, I am not sure that isn't more appealing. I could see us offering a real solid value for schools like Colorado, Arizona, ASU, Utah, BYU in our league. It is not out of the realm of possibility that the Big 12 could implode. If you slide those guys over into our new league, we are stronger than the Big 12 AND more regional. Just say no to "warm body" expansion. Nobody expected the current opportunity and we don't want such a bloated league we can't take advantage of future opportunities. UTSA reminds me of BSU in the early days as far as exceptional growth. UTSA didn't sponsor football until 2012. So in 11 years they've gone from FCS to CUSA to AAC and now have an athletic budget that is on SJSU level. Just won their 2nd straight conference title. These guys are on a steep trajectory and it behooves us to invite them. San Antonio market. Already have a 36k football stadium. Learn from the mistakes of the P12, where no university was good enough for them. UTEP I get people dogging them. If they would commit to MWC level athletic funding I'd still like to see them in. Pretty much the only option out there that has a history with several MWC institutions. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alum93 Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 8:47 AM, SteedLaw said: You expand to 16 teams to solidify your permanent auto bid to the CFP, not to avoid poaching. Your last post said add Texas State, UTSA, and UTEP. That will not help solidifying a CFP bid. They are going to change the autobids from 6 to 5 based off what happened to the PAC. That still allows one non power conference team to get an invite. With the teams that are left at the G5 level, now including WSU and OSU, that bid will be up for grabs every year. The AAC, MWC, and Sun Belt will all produce teams that are capable of getting an invite in any given year. The only way for a new conference to separate itself moving forward is for Rebel's dream to come true, take the top 4-5 teams of MWC and AAC and add them to the P2. And since 99% of us agree that isn't happening, then you will have multiple G5 conferences at a similar level. That's a good thing by the way. With respect to UTSA, i wrote on here years ago that MWC should have taken them before the AAC ultimately did. Now they aren't coming, especially if AAC backfills the SMU loss with Army. I am not even sure Texas State would want out of the Sun Belt. UTEP would love to join its form WAC conference mates. First things first, work out the reverse merger and see what the new contract looks like. My guess is still the same, no one is leaving the AAC to join the MWC teams. The money doesn't justify it, nor does the travel for oly sports. Both will still be solid G5 conferences moving forward until the next round of musical chairs when the ACC schools start finding other homes. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithy Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 8:18 AM, SparkysDad said: Don't think the Big XII is looking in the MWC or the reverse-merged new Pac direction. If Yormark is that hungry, he could instantly have OSU/Wazzu or SDSU or Fresno or insert your team's name here unless it's UNLV. I think the Big Boys (SEC, Big 10 and not-at-their-level-but-the-next-most-powerful Big XII) will wait to see what's going on with the ACC and potentially Notre Dame for much more valuable expansion targets. JMHO, but the MWC and Pac 2 have short term stability (until the ACC gets out of the GOR) working in their favor to do things in stages. First priority: reverse merge with the NW Twins and current MWC members; second priority: get as much as possible for media rights; third priority: everything else. The only thing I've seen contrary to my opinion is Gloria's "16 is ideal" quote. Don't know the timing of her statement, but was it before Calfurd left? That timing would matter if so. I think Gloria mentioned it when she was on the Monty Show a few months back stating that "16" was ideal number. I agree the MW needs to add up to 16 since their pickings in the indy teams are getting smaller and it is harder for AD's to schedule preseason games due to everybody already booked up. Especially as conferences go, the availability factor for scheduling FBS teams is shrinking fast. I remember Fresno's AD had to scramble to get Kent State to cover this years BYU's loss when they bailed for the B12 and it was hard over a year ago. I'm sure Boise had to do the same plus they had more BYU games scheduled. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 9:47 AM, SteedLaw said: You expand to 16 teams to solidify your permanent auto bid to the CFP, not to avoid poaching. 1 1 1 Quote It gives me a headache just trying to think down to your level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 8:27 AM, SteedLaw said: Decimated? No. But potentially raided by the Big XII? Yes. Yormark is not going to stop long-term at 16 teams. LOL...Any future B12 expansion will be east, not west. 4 1 1 Quote It gives me a headache just trying to think down to your level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdgaucho Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 12:57 AM, wolfpack1 said: As an article I read today, said there is a lot of logistics, legal language and things about those lines for any kind of merger between the two conferences that would have to be worked out as MWC has assets as well that would be affected by such a merger. Which you need all the information you can to get an accurate picture which includes all the lawsuits currently going on against Pac-12 all debt, money owed etc. Then into that you will have the NCAA involved as well in some aspects of it which takes time to figure everything out, and haven't even brought up the media contracts yet, which their lawyers and such are going to get involved in as well and don't forget bowl agreements as well. There are a lot of different tentacles out there for a merger that all would have to be worked out and its a process and not a quick process, but also remember it was MWC that brought up in an article about a scheduling agreement. But again no one knows what is going on except a group of people, and everyone is guessing what is going to happen. This will also being laying groundwork for two years from now with a new TV contract as well. I just don't see our TV partners going up to $10 million per school just like that especially with two years remaining on the current deal. To easy for the to say yea we can wait another year to start talks on a new contract and everything stays the same until then. On another note did see a note today that AAC could be look at adding a non football member if Army decides to sign up with AAC. VCU, come on down. You're the next member of the Aresco League Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 7:14 AM, Akkula said: I honestly don't "get" the idea of adding UTSA, UTEP, North Texas, Texas State, etc. I see no Boise State, TCU, WSU, OSU, in this group. Which one of these teams isn't going to be there in five years? Who is offering us a big chunk of money to take them? We shouldn't be adding schools just to have additional "warm bodies." 14 members if we add WSU and OSU is plenty. We could lose a few members and still have plenty of schools to form a conference. Does anybody really feel like we are in danger of being raided and decimated by the ACC or Big 12? Maybe they could take 1-2 teams but I can't see much more. Those conferences are already to big. Plus, if we add Texas schools those are probably more likely to get caught up in Eastern expansion. I could honestly see a scenario where some schools decide that being part of a superconference where the "Yankees" are so far in front of everyone, isn't any fun any longer. I could also see the Big12 and ACC being picked apart. If our new conference can get access to the playoff and our champion has an easier path, I am not sure that isn't more appealing. I could see us offering a real solid value for schools like Colorado, Arizona, ASU, Utah, BYU in our league. It is not out of the realm of possibility that the Big 12 could implode. If you slide those guys over into our new league, we are stronger than the Big 12 AND more regional. Just say no to "warm body" expansion. Nobody expected the current opportunity and we don't want such a bloated league we can't take advantage of future opportunities. Exactly. It's more likely that Houston or Iowa State joins us in 5 to 10 years than it is that SDSU or BSU joins them. Sit tight. UTEP, UTSA, and Texas State ain't going anywhere. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactowndog Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 6:27 AM, SteedLaw said: Decimated? No. But potentially raided by the Big XII? Yes. Yormark is not going to stop long-term at 16 teams. IMHO, 16-18 teams should be the goal for 2024 and beyond. And, Nevarez has already stated that 16 teams is the ideal goal. The top 6 conferences will send their champion to the CFP. (There is at least some talk that might drop to the top 5.) With the reverse merger, we would be the “5th best” at present. Aresco is going to try to do all he can to change that. It would be wise to try to add a team or two in Texas — especially if those schools agree to a reduced payout over a period of years — or even little to no payout until the contracts are renegotiated. We would not be the clear 5th best without Memphis and Tulane. That reason is why they both must be included. The clear top 3 are Memphis, Tulane, UTSA. Both Tulane and Memphis have a higher power rating than any MWC school and Tulane is higher than WSU. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactowndog Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 9:54 AM, Brew_Poke said: Exactly. It's more likely that Houston or Iowa State joins us in 5 to 10 years than it is that SDSU or BSU joins them. Sit tight. UTEP, UTSA, and Texas State ain't going anywhere. If the range fans are reflective of their Presidents I am slowly moving in SDSU’s camp we should pay whatever, leave with SDSU, UNLV, Boise, Hawaii, and maybe SJSU and form a best of the rest in the PAC-12 with more visionary aggressive schools. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf from 73 Posted September 8, 2023 Share Posted September 8, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 10:02 AM, sactowndog said: If the range fans are reflective of their Presidents I am slowly moving in SDSU’s camp we should pay whatever, leave with SDSU, UNLV, Boise, Hawaii, and maybe SDSU and form a best of the rest in the PAC-12 with more visionary aggressive schools. Further expansion beyond the P2 will depend on the contract and value of adding anybody else. It will be dictated and directed by the media people and not presidents and conference commissioners. Although they hold the final vote to add they are not the mover behind conference expansion. Its all about the money. If they indicate that there would be added value to the contract if we added a couple or up to 4 schools in Texas guess what we would be doing. We would be talking to some Texas schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...