Jump to content
Did I hear a WOOSH?

Conference Realignment thread

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Someone Else said:

My opinion (based on my super secret insider info..lolz) is that you are correct.  The key to these things is TV money, yes?  Why on earth would anyone in the MW want to add teams to the conference.  It lowers each member's respective share of the pie.  I can't understand why the B12 & the aac losing members would somehow create some NEW reason for the MW to add any new teams. the MW didn't lose any members???

The only reason I could see a school like BSU or SDSU to want to add schools from TX would be to lessen the control the front range schools have on the conference... and if I'm a front ranger why would I want to agree to that and get less money too??? 

If the available TX schools would somehow add value to the conference from a tv standpoint those moves would have already happened.  (And no one from the MW is waiting for the aac to do anything...)

The Colorado Ad is the one publicly pushing hard for this and he answers many of the objection you bring up. CT has also recently mentioned possible Texas additions. So until it is publicly stated that they are done its not done.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, East Coast Aztec said:

The least appreciated?  I may say ECU or Temple.  Maybe even USF.  Tulsa is pretty over-appreciated seeing as how they have not done much in OOC, don't have a big alumni base, and have outdated facilities and a market dominated by OU and OSU.  ECU controls east NC, USF is in fertile recruiting ground and has a large alumni base.  They just need to re-energize their fans.  Same with Temple, who has a pretty good basketball history.  Tulsa has none of those, but they are in the middle of the country, so I guess that is their enticing factor.  

From what I've been reading, it sounds like Temple is worried.  They are kind of isolated away from the rest of the conference.  Travel costs are really hurting them.  There has been suggestions that they move their oly sports to the A-10.  I think that would be a good move for them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours 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.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/athletic-director-joe-parker-joins-to-talk-about-the/id1509883324?i=1000537540349

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

From what I've been reading, it sounds like Temple is worried.  They are kind of isolated away from the rest of the conference.  Travel costs are really hurting them.  There has been suggestions that they move their oly sports to the A-10.  I think that would be a good move for them.

What about football?  They still have some recent good teams, so it isn't like they don't care about it.  If they can nab Marshall and App, maybe even Coastal or ODU, they may be able to balance divisions for them.  A-10 will likely be a much better fit for basketball though, you are right. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, wolf from 73 said:

The Colorado Ad is the one publicly pushing hard for this and he answers many of the objection you bring up. CT has also recently mentioned possible Texas additions. So until it is publicly stated that they are done its not done.

 

 

I'm not sure that the Colorado St. AD  speaks for the conference...maybe he does but I doubt it since he wanted to go to the aac and it didn't happen (right?)... but for a moment, lets say he does .... here were my questions.  how does he answer them?

1) Why on earth would anyone in the MW want to add teams given it simply reduces each school's share of desperately needed money?

2) Why does the B12 & aac losing schools create some NEW reason, one that didn't exist prior to those moves, for the MW to add any teams since the MW didn't lose any teams?

3) If the reason to add teams comes from BSU & SDSU... and it's because they want to lessen the control the front range schools have on the conference... why would the front range schools want that?

I'll take your answer off the air.  Thanks!

(btw, I don't know who or what CT is so I can't speak to that.... EDIT... CT must be Hair... got it... what exactly did Hair say???)

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Someone Else said:

 

1) Why on earth would anyone in the MW want to add teams given it simply reduces each school's share of desperately needed money?

 

Not necessarily true...thanks to the shifting ground of realignment, the TV deals these days have language to adjust the value based on membership changes.  Couldn't tell you how the MWC deal might be written, but I think its safe to say few schools would be on board with adding schools if it cut into their revenues.  Maintaining revenue levels would be a reasonable goal.

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

I have no opinion on him as a person.  Immature, but whatever.

 

 

And yes, it is stupid.  But when people post falsehoods, intentionally or unintentionally, if its wrong to call them on it, so be it.  I make no apologies.  If people are going to take it so personally and lash out so childishly, they need to look in the mirror.

 

It should be noted I do the same thing with Woosh.  I dont hear anybody complaining about that...quite the opposite, in fact.

 

I enjoy discussing the topic at hand, no matter the conference.  So I'm not going anywhere.  Have a nice day.

You're dumb as +++++. Anytime I say that I hear something I put it down and any time I have an opinion I put it down. You like to mix the two. And it doesn't take much effort to look at what I am right or wrong about. I hear stuff that ends up being wrong all the time. Bit I also get a lot right.

I told you a long time ago to just ignore me but you decided to lush it and be a dick for no reason. Then you tell me I need thinker skin.  Halfman already told people that who knew who my source was and admitted that they would know the things I post. Bit that wasn't good enough for you just like links to beat writers and podcast folks on the know isn't good enough for you.

You don't wanna ignore me then fine but I don't like you. I think you're a piece of shit, and I'll never respect you. You're the perfect example of why they should hand out condoms at Wal-Mart and the reason why drunk men come home and beat their wives. Because they have mistakes like you.

You're some internet know it all tough guy who refuses to let people have opinions and conversations and you sure as Hell don't wanna admit you're wrong.

For the rest of the people on the board I'll drop it and won't respond to your unless you open your shit water to me first. Bit I'll never give you any respect. That time has passed.

  • Facepalm 1
  • OG R-Tard 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RSF said:

Not necessarily true...thanks to the shifting ground of realignment, the TV deals these days have language to adjust the value based on membership changes.  Couldn't tell you how the MWC deal might be written, but I think its safe to say few schools would be on board with adding schools if it cut into their revenues.  Maintaining revenue levels would be a reasonable goal.

So, I agree, the only reason why the MW would add any teams is because CBS told them to in order to maintain or slightly increase TV revenue.  If that is the reason... seems reasonable... I am not sure adding any of the available TX teams does that but I'm not a CBS executive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, wolfpack1 said:

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

 

In the UTSA to the MW tweet one poster mentioned that UTSA just announced major facilities upgrade. My guess that they are going somewhere,

 

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

So, I agree, the only reason why the MW would add any teams is because CBS told them to in order to maintain or slightly increase TV revenue.  If that is the reason... seems reasonable... I am not sure adding any of the available TX teams does that but I'm not a CBS executive.

Adding North Texas and UTSA would add media value to the next contract based off the population. It's somewhat true that someone like North Texas doesn't draw eyes to TV but networks have a make an assumption how much consumers North Texas would gain or lose with a move. UTEP would gain the most viewers and is a big market but it's a market that doesn't help anyone on the MWC already. Every other team in Texas does.

CSU wanted the move for themselves. They blame not being in other time zones for the reason they have struggled. Plus he mentions the recruiting. So it's fair to say no one on Texas adds to our next deal. It's more of finding schools who can grow and become valuable over time while taking the resources Texas provides.

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

I guess in terms of facilities, those two would be the best (or least horrible) programs.  But neither of them really helps us. 

The only program that does help, IMO, is SMU and they want to stay in an eastern based conference.  IMO, the only chance we'd have is if we could offer them more money after the new media deal, expand to 16, and create an eastern pod or division. 

They will come if they are left out of another expansion move by the B12 that takes Memphis and or USF even if we lose Boise.

  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Adding 2 Texas schools can benefit everyone involved.

CSU and AF get the Texas access that they want.

It pushes Boise into the West Division which is what all the Western schools and Boise want.

IMO the biggest issue would be what schools from Texas would they add since there isn't a clear choice (assuming SMU stays in the AAC). All of them have glaring issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, wolf from 73 said:

The Colorado Ad is the one publicly pushing hard for this and he answers many of the objection you bring up. CT has also recently mentioned possible Texas additions. So until it is publicly stated that they are done its not done.

 

Was CSU invited to the AAC for football only, or all sports?     

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

I like UTEP but they are kind  isolated, it really isn't getting into TX.  They are more like eastern New Mexico. 

If we do expand with a bloc of TX schools, they would likely be in the mix, IMO.  They are the 23rd most populous city in the USA.  

Two MW ADs recently said UTEP is a no go for the MW.

  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wolf from 73 said:

Two MW ADs recently said UTEP is a no go for the MW.

I can see why.  Although it is the 23rd largest city in the USA.  I suppose we could do worse if we had to add anyone, which we do not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

The least appreciated?  I may say ECU or Temple.  Maybe even USF.  Tulsa is pretty over-appreciated seeing as how they have not done much in OOC, don't have a big alumni base, and have outdated facilities and a market dominated by OU and OSU.  ECU controls east NC, USF is in fertile recruiting ground and has a large alumni base.  They just need to re-energize their fans.  Same with Temple, who has a pretty good basketball history.  Tulsa has none of those, but they are in the middle of the country, so I guess that is their enticing factor.  

I think we’re saying the same thing.  I don’t mean emotional appreciation, I mean appreciated value.  While I agree Temple may be next on the list they’ve actually been relatively well run in all sports and in football up until lately and had they held onto Diaz would probably still be a factor in football.  ECU is valued in the conference, even though they’ve struggled adapting to the competition this time around they have the best fanbase left in the new g5 and are dominant in another sport.  They also look much better this year in football.  usf has fallen into karma hell for the foreseeable future but has the ability to rebuild themselves well in time.

  • Like 1
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.




×
×
  • Create New...