Jump to content

Archived

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

Cowboy

Should the MWC try to land UNT, Rice, UTEP, and/or UTSA FIRST?

Recommended Posts

In response to the OP, I see the MWC having three options if we lose CSU and AFA:

  1. Stand pat with 10 football members and and try to add Gonzaga as a 10th Olympic sports member.  If the Zags pass, stay at 9 Olympic sports members or pick up a different non-football addition from the pool of other candidates in the footprint (Denver, Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon).  Changing Hawaii's membership to all sports would be another possibility, although travel would be an issue (both ways) since the conference would be too small for divisional play.
  2. Expand back to 12 football members.  The best candidates are in Texas (North Texas, Rice or UTSA) but it may not be possible to convince just two to come by themselves since travel for their Olympic sports would be an issue for them.  An alternative would be to invite Montana for all sports and NDSU for football only, but reaching down into FCS for additions would be a bad look.
  3. Expand to 14 football members with four Texas schools (North Texas, Rice, UTSA, UTEP or Texas State).  Four would be easier to land than two because it would allow the conference to split into divisions and reduce travel expenses for both the western and eastern outliers.  Since 13 is a difficult number for Olympic sports, Hawaii's membership could be expanded to all sports which would be less problematic with divisions.

Strategically options 1 and 3 make more sense to me than option 2.  The appeal of option 1 is that it would likely increase the per-school payout in the short run and might actually improve the football and basketball strength of the conference.  The downside is the negative national perception stemming from getting raided and "doing nothing", and the reality that if we were to lose any more members in the next round of realignment it would be even harder to backfill by expanding into Texas.  Option 3 would reduce payouts and weaken the conference competitively in the short run, but could have a higher long-term payoff if the new additions invest in their programs and if all conference members are able to recruit better in Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFA and CSU leaving the Conference is no biggie. We'll play 9 in Conference. 

While I do have tons of respect and admiration for the Student-Athlete - Warriors at our Service Acadamies, i hate playing their chop blocking asses. To many kids get their knees and ankles messed up.

CS-Ewe is no loss in no way to every member except Wyoming. They will probably schedule OOC games anyway.

Basketball wise, our SOS increases without them. Get hot and sweaty for Gonzaga and Wichita. That should be the only move.

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, HawaiiMongoose said:

In response to the OP, I see the MWC having three options if we lose CSU and AFA:

  1. Stand pat with 10 football members and and try to add Gonzaga as a 10th Olympic sports member.  If the Zags pass, stay at 9 Olympic sports members or pick up a different non-football addition from the pool of other candidates in the footprint (Denver, Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon).  Changing Hawaii's membership to all sports would be another possibility, although travel would be an issue (both ways) since the conference would be too small for divisional play.
  2. Expand back to 12 football members.  The best candidates are in Texas (North Texas, Rice or UTSA) but it may not be possible to convince just two to come by themselves since travel for their Olympic sports would be an issue for them.  An alternative would be to invite Montana for all sports and NDSU for football only, but reaching down into FCS for additions would be a bad look.
  3. Expand to 14 football members with four Texas schools (North Texas, Rice, UTSA, UTEP or Texas State).  Four would be easier to land than two because it would allow the conference to split into divisions and reduce travel expenses for both the western and eastern outliers.  Since 13 is a difficult number for Olympic sports, Hawaii's membership could be expanded to all sports which would be less problematic with divisions.

Strategically options 1 and 3 make more sense to me than option 2.  The appeal of option 1 is that it would likely increase the per-school payout in the short run and might actually improve the football and basketball strength of the conference.  The downside is the negative national perception stemming from getting raided and "doing nothing", and the reality that if we were to lose any more members in the next round of realignment it would be even harder to backfill by expanding into Texas.  Option 3 would reduce payouts and weaken the conference competitively in the short run, but could have a higher long-term payoff if the new additions invest in their programs and if all conference members are able to recruit better in Texas.

Yep we need to do option 2 or 3.  Standing at 10 entails too much risk.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spaztecs said:

AFA and CSU leaving the Conference is no biggie. We'll play 9 in Conference. 

While I do have tons of respect and admiration for the Student-Athlete - Warriors at our Service Acadamies, i hate playing their chop blocking asses. To many kids get their knees and ankles messed up.

CS-Ewe is no loss in no way to every member except Wyoming. They will probably schedule OOC games anyway.

Basketball wise, our SOS increases without them. Get hot and sweaty for Gonzaga and Wichita. That should be the only move.

I don't know why either Wichita State or Gonzaga would have any interest in the MW.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF AFA & CSU are both stupid enough to take an offer from the AAC - The MWC could:

1) Do nothing & stand pat at 10 schools, lose the divisions & go back to a 9 game MWC schedule

2) Add UTEP & NMSU - a bit of a step down in FB overall but probably a step up in BB - Losing AFA FB hurts while losing AF BB is a net gainer for NMSU & UTEP & probably a push for losing CSU FB & BB 

3) Go bigger into Texas by adding UTEP, UTSA, SMU along with one of (NMSU, North Texas, Texas St) as a 4th option going to seven teams in each division with 6 Division games & 2 or 3 cross division games (the 4 new adds along with UNM, Wyoming & USU in the eastern division 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HawaiiMongoose said:

In response to the OP, I see the MWC having three options if we lose CSU and AFA:

  1. Stand pat with 10 football members and and try to add Gonzaga as a 10th Olympic sports member.  If the Zags pass, stay at 9 Olympic sports members or pick up a different non-football addition from the pool of other candidates in the footprint (Denver, Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon).  Changing Hawaii's membership to all sports would be another possibility, although travel would be an issue (both ways) since the conference would be too small for divisional play.
  2. Expand back to 12 football members.  The best candidates are in Texas (North Texas, Rice or UTSA) but it may not be possible to convince just two to come by themselves since travel for their Olympic sports would be an issue for them.  An alternative would be to invite Montana for all sports and NDSU for football only, but reaching down into FCS for additions would be a bad look.
  3. Expand to 14 football members with four Texas schools (North Texas, Rice, UTSA, UTEP or Texas State).  Four would be easier to land than two because it would allow the conference to split into divisions and reduce travel expenses for both the western and eastern outliers.  Since 13 is a difficult number for Olympic sports, Hawaii's membership could be expanded to all sports which would be less problematic with divisions.

Strategically options 1 and 3 make more sense to me than option 2.  The appeal of option 1 is that it would likely increase the per-school payout in the short run and might actually improve the football and basketball strength of the conference.  The downside is the negative national perception stemming from getting raided and "doing nothing", and the reality that if we were to lose any more members in the next round of realignment it would be even harder to backfill by expanding into Texas.  Option 3 would reduce payouts and weaken the conference competitively in the short run, but could have a higher long-term payoff if the new additions invest in their programs and if all conference members are able to recruit better in Texas.

Over It Eye Roll GIF

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cowboy said:

With all the smoke that the AAC will likely secure the the NAVY-Air Force rivalry as well as Colorado State...

A.) Should the MWC try to beat the AAC into Texas, and try to procure a commitment from any number of North Texas, Rice, UTEP, and/or UTSA?

B.) Would those teams come to the MWC?

IMO, the AAC should try to expand by one more into Texas too. They already have SMU but could probably use another.

Perhaps Criag Thompson could try to beat the AAC to the punch and lock in some commitments.

air_force_navy_reschedule_2_2.jpg

The biggest mistakes I've ever made in business is reacting to a perceived threat with poor options. This is no different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nvspuds said:

I don't know why either Wichita State or Gonzaga would have any interest in the MW.  

Wichita because the AAC B-ball strength has taken a Gi-nNormous hit. Which makes it harder to make the Tourney as an at-large.

The Zags cause their schedule strength also took a hit with the defection of BYU.

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

IF AFA & CSU are both stupid enough to take an offer from the AAC - The MWC could:

1) Do nothing & stand pat at 10 schools, lose the divisions & go back to a 9 game MWC schedule

2) Add UTEP & NMSU - a bit of a step down in FB overall but probably a step up in BB - Losing AFA FB hurts while losing AF BB is a net gainer for NMSU & UTEP & probably a push for losing CSU FB & BB 

3) Go bigger into Texas by adding UTEP, UTSA, SMU along with one of (NMSU, North Texas, Texas St) as a 4th option going to seven teams in each division with 6 Division games & 2 or 3 cross division games (the 4 new adds along with UNM, Wyoming & USU in the eastern division 

The NewMags, Miners, and UT-whatever schools, add ZERO VALUE to either the FB or B-ball side of the Conference.

I also believe the Conference is stronger without CSU and AFA. As an Aztec fan I would love to play the remaining four schools every season. We usually have highly competitive games with them.

It also fixes the Hair- brained 20 B-ball game Conference schedule.

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Spaztecs said:

Over It Eye Roll GIF

See option 1.  It's exactly the same as what you said we should do.

I get that you think going big with multiple Texas additions is a bad idea.  Frankly if I was forced to choose I would opt for standing pat as well.  But I think the MWC has to consider option 3 as well given the open support among multiple Big 12 members for further expansion.  If we stand pat and then Boise State and/or SDSU get cherry-picked away we'll have no choice but to backfill, and because we'll be weaker we'll likely have fewer and worse options to choose from.  University presidents are a risk-averse bunch and backfilling now is the safer play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Spaztecs said:

AFA and CSU leaving the Conference is no biggie. We'll play 9 in Conference. 

 

 

Staying at 10 will be a big hit to media partners.

Consequently, the MWC will suffer a big financial haircut.

Losing those brands and that INVENTORY will fundamentally alter those MWC payouts with CBSSN/FS1.

CBSSN especially loves the academies.

The AAC will gain significant separation with just those 2. 

IMO, ESPN has identified the brands of value, and they'll position their league in football and basketball to take advantage of the brand power.

 

3mxsBs3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Spaztecs said:

The NewMags, Miners, and UT-whatever schools, add ZERO VALUE to either the FB or B-ball side of the Conference.

I also believe the Conference is stronger without CSU and AFA. As an Aztec fan I would love to play the remaining four schools every season. We usually have highly competitive games with them.

It also fixes the Hair- brained 20 B-ball game Conference schedule.

I do not believe the 20 game schedule was Thompson's idea..7 presidents voted for it..4 against..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cowboy said:

 

Staying at 10 will be a big hit for media partners.

Losing those brands and that INVENTORY will fundamentally alter those MWC payouts with CBSSN/FS1.

CBSSN especially loves the academies.

The AAC will gain significant separation with just those 2. 

IMO, ESPN has identified the brands of value, and they'll position their league in football and basketball to take advantage of the brand power.

 

Again, I am not sure you understand the dynamics here..I don't believe for even a second you are a Wyoming fan..You are somebody's sock..

ESPN is not interested in the MW and the Texas schools will take a long hard look before hooking up with a conference that kicked them out with an airport meeting once before..

None of these will be easy decisions and it is unlikely the presidents will agree on much of anything..

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nvspuds said:

Again, I am not sure you understand the dynamics here..I don't believe for even a second you are a Wyoming fan..You are somebody's sock..

ESPN is not interested in the MW and the Texas schools will take a long hard look before hooking up with a conference that kicked them out with an airport meeting once before..

None of these will be easy decisions and it is unlikely the presidents will agree on much of anything..

 

 

 

Silly talk.

Mark my words...

Hair Thompson should be on the phone with the Presidents of (at least) North Texas and UT-San Antonio, pronto. The MWC needs to be in the program building business now. ***Neither of those schools were anywhere near the Airport meeting.***

You'll see...

3mxsBs3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

 

Staying at 10 will be a big hit to media partners.

Consequently, the MWC will suffer a big financial haircut.

Losing those brands and that INVENTORY will fundamentally alter those MWC payouts with CBSSN/FS1.

CBSSN especially loves the academies.

The AAC will gain significant separation with just those 2. 

IMO, ESPN has identified the brands of value, and they'll position their league in football and basketball to take advantage of the brand power.

 

Actually, the value should increase.  

Ever seen the lack of crowds at Csu and AF games ?

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OrediggerPoke said:

There is no smoke to that effect.  This is just bullshit spread by you and a couple other AAC fans equally uninformed.  
 

just stop

Im wondering which aac troll  owns this sock? Constantly pimping the aac, when they jave zero leverage tolure away a MWC school.

G5 1-5 = MWC, Sunbelt, MAC, aac, CUSA.

"Make a mistake once and it becomes a lesson, make the same mistake twice and it becomes a choice."
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Spaztecs said:

Wichita because the AAC B-ball strength has taken a Gi-nNormous hit. Which makes it harder to make the Tourney as an at-large.

The Zags cause their schedule strength also took a hit with the defection of BYU.

We can't match the $ the Zags get in the WCC.

We already passed on Wichita before the joined the AAC.

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

Barack Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spaztecs said:

Actually, the value should increase.  

Ever seen the lack of crowds at Csu and AF games ?

 

I strongly disagree,

The MWC will need to get into the program building business to try and provide some value for the $$$ that will be lost.

Those are 2 solid brands.

We will see how it goes. I know that AFA is looking forward to being with NAVY and Niko Medved is probably looking at Wichita State and Memphis and knows what those associations will do for his basketball recruiting.

No one should be talking badly about those schools. Enough of that. They are doing what's best for them.

3mxsBs3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...