Jump to content
Did I hear a WOOSH?

Conference Realignment thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, wolfpack1 said:

I also think the backlash from some fans and boosters played a roll as well. I mean with boosters they really dont like it if something like that is happening and the AD doesn't talk to them.

Yeah he said that they heard the backlash loud and clear. He acted like it didn't play a roll because they have to do what is best for the school but yeah, I agree with you. Not sure how important a booster would be for Air Force but I'm not gonna pretend to know how the service academies work.

I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Reverend said:

UTSA will probably end up in the AAC. North Texas will end up being on the MWC. Rice is the question mark. I think they fit on better with the AAC though.

Facility wise, that would be a win I think for MWC for team wise ehh. Whoever gets Rice is a big loser

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Reverend said:

Yeah he said that they heard the backlash loud and clear. He acted like it didn't play a roll because they have to do what is best for the school but yeah, I agree with you. Not sure how important a booster would be for Air Force but I'm not gonna pretend to know how the service academies work.

Well if a group of people who are helping to fund your new stadium come to you and say we dont' like this and even lightly threaten to pull their funding you kind of have to listen to that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a hypothetical question.  Assume we aren't looking to expand for the sake of expanding.  If we're just looking to improve the MWC, all other things aside.  Who do we look at?

Gonzaga, obviously.

And then for football, market, academics?  Anyone?

UTSA, N. Texas, and so on?  Nah, they're all filler.  Is there a legitimate addition that we'd go after if it weren't driven by the perceived need to just expand?  The answer is no.  So what's all the fuss about?  It's a pretty insecure conference that's looking to downgrade just in case we can't fix our internal issues and make ourselves stronger.  Maybe a downgrade is all we deserve if that's the case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Reverend said:

UTSA will probably end up in the AAC. North Texas will end up being in the MWC. Rice is the question mark. I think they fit on better with the AAC though. That's my guess.

I have read Rice is unwilling to increase their athletic budget and aren't really interested in moving up.

 

 

  • Like 2

"Don't underestimate Joe Biden's ability to F@*k things up."

Barack Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

Just a hypothetical question.  Assume we aren't looking to expand for the sake of expanding.  If we're just looking to improve the MWC, all other things aside.  Who do we look at?

Gonzaga, obviously.

And then for football, market, academics?  Anyone?

UTSA, N. Texas, and so on?  Nah, they're all filler.  Is there a legitimate addition that we'd go after if it weren't driven by the perceived need to just expand?  The answer is no.  So what's all the fuss about?  It's a pretty insecure conference that's looking to downgrade just in case we can't fix our internal issues and make ourselves stronger.  Maybe a downgrade is all we deserve if that's the case.

Call your AD.  He is one of those pushing it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

I have read Rice is unwilling to increase their athletic budget and aren't really interested in moving up.

 

 

They have spent close to $60 million building or upgrading athletic facilities over the last few years. The new end zone football complete is more subdued than the gorgeous complexes that Utah State, Wyoming, and UNLV have but it's a modern facility.

The question is would a move to the MWC or AAC get the program a boost in popularity off and on campus? Probably not.

  • Like 1

I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Billings said:

Call your AD.  He is one of those pushing it

Not likely.  I know what he's said, but he's hardly a visionary.  He's parroting a company line, likely from CT.  Original thinking does not originate in the CSU AD anymore, not since Jack Graham was fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Headbutt said:

Not likely.  I know what he's said, but he's hardly a visionary.  He's parroting a company line, likely from CT.  Original thinking does not originate in the CSU AD anymore, not since Jack Graham was fired.

You almost went to the AAC. I am thinking you are not giving him enough credit.

I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Reverend said:

You almost went to the AAC. I am thinking you are not giving him enough credit.

We were never even close to going to the AAC.  In fact, per an interview with our AD, it never got past the AD exploratory level.  There was never a request for an invitation nor an invitation.  Apparently never even hit the president level at all.  So much for the media.

There's no question that CSU looked into it, that happened.  However, there was no last minute backing out on an almost done deal by CSU.  It just never got that close.  If I can find the interview, I'll post it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

We were never even close to going to the AAC.  In fact, per an interview with our AD, it never got past the AD exploratory level.  There was never a request for an invitation nor an invitation.  Apparently never even hit the president level at all.  So much for the media.

There's no question that CSU looked into it, that happened.  However, there was no last minute backing out on an almost done deal by CSU.  It just never got that close.  If I can find the interview, I'll post it.

Here's the interview.  Our AD isn't a visionary, but he does always tell it like it is.  Good or bad.  He catches a lot of grief for not sugarcoating or promoting.  He's like an actuary running an athletic department, not a lot of fun but he doesn't bullshit either.

https://anchor.fm/ramnation-radio/episodes/Athletic-Director-Joe-Parker-joins-to-talk-about-the-recent-flirtation-with-the-AAC-and-much-more-e18adcb

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

Here's the interview.  Our AD isn't a visionary, but he does always tell it like it is.  Good or bad.  He catches a lot of grief for not sugarcoating or promoting.  He's like an actuary running an athletic department, not a lot of fun but he doesn't bullshit either.

https://anchor.fm/ramnation-radio/episodes/Athletic-Director-Joe-Parker-joins-to-talk-about-the-recent-flirtation-with-the-AAC-and-much-more-e18adcb

Out of curiosity is it true that him and the AF AD are wanting to push into Texas? Keep hearing claims and counterclaims about the subject. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, utgrizfan said:

Out of curiosity is it true that him and the AF AD are wanting to push into Texas? Keep hearing claims and counterclaims about the subject. 

I do think there is a push for the Central Time Zone.  I think it's talking points from the conference, but who knows.  CT definitely wants expansion to buffer losing teams in realignment, and there's not a lot left in the Mountain or Pacific time zones, so there is an obvious interest in TX.  I think that if the MWC does expand, they'll go east.  I just personally think that the MWC is better served by looking to improve their own house rather than go looking for additions.  Unfortunately, MWC leadership can't really get on board with that since they are the biggest obstacle to improving the conference as it stands.

To fix the MWC, you have to scrap the top.  The top ain't going to volunteer for that resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Headbutt said:

I do think there is a push for the Central Time Zone.  I think it's talking points from the conference, but who knows.  CT definitely wants expansion to buffer losing teams in realignment, and there's not a lot left in the Mountain or Pacific time zones, so there is an obvious interest in TX.  I think that if the MWC does expand, they'll go east.  I just personally think that the MWC is better served by looking to improve their own house rather than go looking for additions.  Unfortunately, MWC leadership can't really get on board with that since they are the biggest obstacle to improving the conference as it stands.

To fix the MWC, you have to scrap the top.  The top ain't going to volunteer for that resolution.

I can definitely agree with fixing the teams you have, however at the same time I understand wanting to protect from future expansion. I support the idea if adding x2 Texas schools to cushion if and when it does happen. Granted as long as the new media deal supports it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, utgrizfan said:

I can definitely agree with fixing the teams you have, however at the same time I understand wanting to protect from future expansion. I support the idea if adding x2 Texas schools to cushion if and when it does happen. Granted as long as the new media deal supports it.

I agree, but are there any TX schools that actually improve the MWC?  I mean schools that we can realistically consider.  SMU ain't coming.  We're sure as hell not going to poach the Big 12.  We'd be better off losing SDSU and Boise and forcing a stronger 10 team conference, than adding just anybody to keep numbers at a certain level.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

I agree, but are there any TX schools that actually improve the MWC?  I mean schools that we can realistically consider.  SMU ain't coming.  We're sure as hell not going to poach the Big 12.  We'd be better off losing SDSU and Boise and forcing a stronger 10 team conference, than adding just anybody to keep numbers at a certain level.

I think UNT and UTSA would be good adds, gives you San Antonio so maybe could negotiate for an Alamo Bowl bid, good potential media exposure (San Antonio was ranked 31st last I checked) and not terrible products on the field both with alot of upside. UTSA in particular would have to upgrade their basketball arena but it's not impossible, the Alamo Dome is a good stadium that works and UNT has a great stadium. Texas State is another option but they have been terrible on the field. They have the resources, just need a coach.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, utgrizfan said:

I think UNT and UTSA would be good adds, gives you San Antonio so maybe could negotiate for an Alamo Bowl bid, good potential media exposure (San Antonio was ranked 31st last I checked) and not terrible products on the field. UTSA in particular would have to upgrade their basketball arena but it's not impossible. Texas State is another option but they have been terrible on the field. They have the resources, just need a coach.

UTSA is having a great year.  That hasn't been the status quo.  Far from it.  A rental stadium, a crap BB facility, commuter school with community college academics, and zero market penetration in San Antonio.  I really do wish them the best, but they're not at a MWC level.  I really think the conference's standards have to be higher than fogging a mirror to add numbers.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Headbutt said:

UTSA is having a great year.  That hasn't been the status quo.  Far from it.  A rental stadium, a crap BB facility, commuter school with community college academics, and zero market penetration in San Antonio.  I really do wish them the best, but they're not at a MWC level.  I really think the conference's standards have to be higher than fogging a mirror to add numbers.

Why I also mentioned Texas State, their biggest issue has been on field performance but their resources and facilities are great. They get the right coach they could be a great addition. Investing for long term isn't a bad idea.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Headbutt said:

Here's the interview.  Our AD isn't a visionary, but he does always tell it like it is.  Good or bad.  He catches a lot of grief for not sugarcoating or promoting.  He's like an actuary running an athletic department, not a lot of fun but he doesn't bullshit either.

https://anchor.fm/ramnation-radio/episodes/Athletic-Director-Joe-Parker-joins-to-talk-about-the-recent-flirtation-with-the-AAC-and-much-more-e18adcb

You realize I posted that interview s few pages ago?

Regardless of what is out in the public, it was pretty close. It was supposed to of been announced this week if you remember.

  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1

I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch.

Link to comment
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.



×
×
  • Create New...