UofMTigers Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 10:54 PM, Wyobraska said: You guys will get a ticket when the ACC loses teams. I think you guys and USF will probably be the first calls. I think it will be tough for WSU and OSU. I doubt a bunch of East Coast schools want to stretch too far West into Oregon and Washington. I don't think the other schools probably care about Stanford and Cal. Their next TV deal will go down. Why drag out travel for everyone else just to help Cal and Stanford? playing the ACC leftovers like GTech, Wake, BC, Cuse, Pitt, etc sounds WAY better than FAU, UAB, UNT, UTSA, UNCC, etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyobraska Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 11:42 PM, UofMTigers said: playing the ACC leftovers like GTech, Wake, BC, Cuse, Pitt, etc sounds WAY better than FAU, UAB, UNT, UTSA, UNCC, etc 1000%. It would be a great move for Memphis if the Big 12 is off the table. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambouche Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 5:33 PM, SanDiegoPoke said: People keep saying that, but even CU struggles for eyeballs with the Broncos, Rockies, Nuggets, and Avalanche. ??? CU has been a national story since Deion Sanders came to town and have been sold out of season tickets for the last two years. They’ve had great TV ratings…they have a loyal fan base that sticks with them when they are bad and Denver media always covers them…Denver is a Broncos town- but the other pro teams? Niche dedicated fan bases with bandwagons (and media coverage) that grow when the teams are good….CSU does fine with media coverage in Denver- dedicated beat writers and local TV coverage is there…CSU sports is a part of the sports media landscape in a rapidly growing state… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyobraska Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 11:42 PM, UofMTigers said: playing the ACC leftovers like GTech, Wake, BC, Cuse, Pitt, etc sounds WAY better than FAU, UAB, UNT, UTSA, UNCC, etc Is the heat going to come down hard on Penny? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jewelz4562000 Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 4:47 PM, agswin said: Honestly, all things being what they are, I am a bit surprised by the indignation of the Pac2 against the MWC. At first, it seemed like most MWC fans were excited about the prospects of WSU/OSU joining/partnering with the MWC. With some time and more displeasure communicated by the former PAC members, the feeling evolved to ambivalence. And, today, I would say that most MWC fans are rather opposed to the PAC2 and really don't want anything to do with them at all. So I guess the PAC2 got exactly what they wanted... They are isolated on an island. Not really P4, Not really G5. Are they happy about it? The mw fans are just angry and bitter. It's like being the 425lb virgin dude. And you get kissed finally but then she rejects you and now you "don't want her." So you just go back to pornhub marathons. It's all evident this is obvious when you watch games at Nevada, New Mex, Hawaii, SJSU and they play in 90% empty stadiums or torn down high schools. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanDiegoPoke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/5/2024 at 5:28 AM, Rambouche said: ??? CU has been a national story since Deion Sanders came to town and have been sold out of season tickets for the last two years. They’ve had great TV ratings…they have a loyal fan base that sticks with them when they are bad and Denver media always covers them…Denver is a Broncos town- but the other pro teams? Niche dedicated fan bases with bandwagons (and media coverage) that grow when the teams are good….CSU does fine with media coverage in Denver- dedicated beat writers and local TV coverage is there…CSU sports is a part of the sports media landscape in a rapidly growing state… San Diego State also has a loyal core base, but it isn't that large. There were hopes that the pro fans might "adopt" SDSU, but it doesn't appear that is happening. Wyoming also gets decent coverage in Denver, as does AFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Someone Else Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 32 minutes ago, SanDiegoPoke said: San Diego State also has a loyal core base, but it isn't that large. There were hopes that the pro fans might "adopt" SDSU, but it doesn't appear that is happening. Wyoming also gets decent coverage in Denver, as does AFA. San Diego, as well as most of CA have 'fair weather' fans. If the team wins they show up. If they don't, there's other stuff to do. That's not the case in middle america. It is what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
415hawaiiboy Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 They are fighting multiple generations of superiority complex against us. Just let them wander the wilderness. Step 1: try to get invited into Big 12 conference (or ACC) - result: get rejected. Step 2: try to buy games with the Big 12 or ACC with the hope you win a lot of those games and prove you’re worthy of an invite or at the very least a Cal/Stanford/SMU type deal (which they will need to use their nest egg to float) - result: TBD but probably what they are trying to do next. I don’t think building another G5 conference and spending a huge chunk of their nest egg is a top priority (nor a prudent use of money: what if a new conference is formed, fees enacted, and the ACC or B12 calls?). Their money is best used to cushion a lower or no payout situation from a P4 (or life as an independent or short term MW member and early exit of themselves). Those options are all better than paying Gloria for fees of 6+ MW members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
415hawaiiboy Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 When you get a one time cash windfall, human psychology is to become very conservative with the money. Not always. I don’t see them “investing” a huge stake in a new conference (aka partnership) with other similarly untrustworthy and ambitious members. Inspired by Kamala: I know ____ (San Diego St’s, USC’s) type! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
415hawaiiboy Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 After getting burned by a previous “partnership” (aka conference), the last thing the administrators for Oregon State, Wash State is going to want to do is “invest” their inheritance in a partnership with the trailer park shysters in the MW who would stab their mamma to get ahead. No, they will do what is prudent and that is assure the people still onboard with them that they will be okay. That means, doing the best they can do, in what they can do, which is scheduling. If they have to pay some money for that (to get what they want), they will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/2/2024 at 4:15 PM, Someone Else said: I'm well aware. If you don't think that statement from the article means something then that's fine. I think it's a major thing. Sure there will be other fees but that kind of takes care of half of it doesn't it? And who knows what the actual fees might be for exiting the conference (should it happen). Like I said above, and got blasted about, for a measly 6 million dollars that 17 mil (or 34 mil) seems very excessive. yes, I am aware that everyone agreed to it. that doesn't mean it will happen exactly that way. jmo It's six million dollars per year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/3/2024 at 6:45 PM, utgrizfan said: The Dakota States admittedly are a wish pick of mine, realistically they probably wouldn't be considered for a MWC rebuild until after the new initial TV of the poached conference. UTEP and NMSU I have no doubt would want to rejoin their old WAC rivals and have a much easier travel situation to save $$. A more realistic scenario: USU, Nevada, SJSU, WYO, AF, New Mexico, *NMSU, *UTEP, *Montana, *MSU, *Idaho, *Sac State A much more regional Conference (by Western Standards) and a pretty decent one IMO. In terms of move up fees the MWC flush with cash could pay half of all the teams move up fees (so in this case 10 million) and have the new schools pay off what they owe over the course of the initial TV deal, lesser shares initially, etc. They'd still be making more then they are now in FCS. Weird to think of NMSU as an old WAC rival, as a charter member of the MWC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 3:53 PM, Wyobraska said: That's a lot of money in fees for that conference configuration. No shit. What's even the break even point? The year 10,000 A.D.? There's no TV contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 5:21 PM, Rosegreen said: Absolute peanuts compared to what OSU and Wazzu are used to. They'll never have USC, Washington, and Oregon earning them money ever again, though, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/4/2024 at 5:49 PM, Beaver-Poke said: Wyoming is probably the only MWC team that has complete dominance in its home market, the entire state of Wyoming. But its home market is so small, it doesn't help. SJSU is even lower on the Bay Area pecking order than CSU is in the Denver pecking order. Laramie and all of Albany County are in the Denver DMA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
415hawaiiboy Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 I believe the following: 1) when you get a one time payout, the careful administrator will use the money conservatively because they don’t know what the future is [paying a substantial amount of the funding to the MW in fees and fees for other schools does not make sense] 2) when you get burned by a “partnership” (aka conference), you tend to be more hesitant on what kind of partnership you enter into next. [Paying a substantial amount of your life raft money for other schools that are just as hungry and potentially backstabbingly ambitious, does not make sense. Knowing they would ditch the conference if something better comes.] 3) using the life raft money to assure the people still onboard with you, that you can pay them and provide them with experiences, which might mean better scheduling, even if you have to pay more money for it - that makes sense. You have in your power the ability to craft your schedule as you see fit. 4) using the life raft money to survive a potential longer term lower revenue environment in the MW or Independence, makes sense. The key is saving the money so you can spend it on yourself. 5) using the life raft money to potentially buy into a Big 12 or ACC like Cal/Stanford/SMU did, makes sense if that scenario arises. Rebuilding the PAC-12 without taking all the MW teams does not make sense, and limits your future ability to do #5 (when you decide to ditch the conference you helped setup). Therefore, a full merger is likely to happen if external events don’t shake things up too dramatically within the next 24 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brew_Poke Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/5/2024 at 3:55 PM, 415hawaiiboy said: 2) when you get burned by a “partnership” (aka conference), you tend to be more hesitant on what kind of partnership you enter into next. [Paying a substantial amount of your life raft money for other schools that are just as hungry and potentially backstabbingly ambitious, does not make sense. Knowing they would ditch the conference if something better comes.] 2nd marriage always has a prenup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
415hawaiiboy Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/5/2024 at 3:00 PM, Brew_Poke said: 2nd marriage always has a prenup. True, but the tie up in the contract negotiations will then be, who will be holding the bag for the alimony to Gloria (if the Pac2 schools find a better marriage and run off in scenario #5). The prenup doesn’t help there and talks will “breakdown.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Someone Else Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 1 hour ago, Brew_Poke said: It's six million dollars per year. And the SEC/B1G get over 100 million per year. My opinion is 6 mil is not a lot of money for what they (the schools) sign on for. You can think differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyobraska Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 On 9/5/2024 at 9:04 AM, jewelz4562000 said: The mw fans are just angry and bitter. It's like being the 425lb virgin dude. And you get kissed finally but then she rejects you and now you "don't want her." So you just go back to pornhub marathons. It's all evident this is obvious when you watch games at Nevada, New Mex, Hawaii, SJSU and they play in 90% empty stadiums or torn down high schools. I think a lot of fans view them as peers, so they don't care if they come or go. Would they help the MW? Absolutely. Would their addition mean huge things for the MW? Nope. They are entering uncharted territory going from large budgets and getting recruits off of a brand they are no longer part of. So I think a lot of people are also curious to see how they react to their new reality and don't want to give them any perceived special treatment. I personally think they are smart to continue to do their due diligence. They don't need to make a decision just yet. The MW was doing its thing before last year and it will continue to do so, with or without those two schools is more of the attitude I see. OSU and WSU weren't going to dramatically change the MW. The current MW schools and all other G5 schools (including OSU and WSU) are pretty much screwed anyway in comparison to the P4. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...