Jump to content

Archived

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

mugtang

MWC Announces Schedule Through 2025

Recommended Posts

On 7/15/2022 at 7:09 AM, Wyobraska said:

What's sad is that everyone knew they would +++++ it up too.  

All they had to do was keep the division scheduling. The beauty of our divisions was that for the most part, our fans could travel to away games. 

Alan Tudyk Dancing GIF by DOOM PATROL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 8:34 AM, Wyobraska said:

Wyoming has played Utah St more than AF all time.  

Sure but barely and mostly before 1980. We didn't play them from 78-2001. We played AF almost as much and we started playing them in 1958. I think it would be crazy to think USU is a bigger rivalry than AF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 8:34 AM, EvilPoke said:

You know it's bad when the 'winning' fans (CSU, WYO, AFA) think the schedule is crap, too. 

They needed 3 guaranteed games. 

Add: wyo-usu, UNM-afa, etc.

I'm ok with the setup. COuld be better but for Wyoming is is a good setup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 8:44 AM, tspoke said:

I'm ok with the setup. COuld be better but for Wyoming is is a good setup.

Oh ... It's outstanding for Wyoming. CSU and Wyoming got exactly what they wanted. This smacks of fallout from the AAC situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is how they should've been (the only outlier is UNM, since the rest of the front range is taken):

Air Force: CSU/WYO

Boise State: NEV/USU

Colorado State: AF/WY

Fresno State: SJSU/SDSU

Hawaii: SJSU/UNLV

Nevada: BSU/UNLV

New Mexico: SDSU/USU

San Diego State: FSU/UNM

San Jose State: FSU/HAW

UNLV: NEV/HAW

Utah State: BSU/UNM

Wyoming: AF/CSU

 

Serious who came up with these? They need to consult the MW board committee next time. We all probably spend more time thinking about this stuff while working our actual jobs than people in the conference offices haha. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes sense in a way. The ADs don't care about fans and rivalries. They just want someone in the CFP or big $ bowl. I don't think they achieve that, but do gild a path for someone each year. 

UNM just hasn't been good enough for so long, that we get tossed aside and frankly don't have a football rival in conference. But I do enjoy playing some teams more than others. SJSU is pretty much at the bottom of that list.

Out of my mind for the Lobos!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 8:21 AM, bigd said:

This is how they should've been (the only outlier is UNM, since the rest of the front range is taken):

Air Force: CSU/NM

Boise State: NEV/USU

Colorado State: AF/WY

Fresno State: SJSU/SDSU

Hawaii: SJSU/UNLV

Nevada: BSU/UNLV

New Mexico: SDSU/AF

San Diego State: FSU/NM

San Jose State: FSU/HAW

UNLV: NEV/HAW

Utah State: BSU/Wyoming

Wyoming: Utah St/CSU

 

Serious who came up with these? They need to consult the MW board committee next time. We all probably spend more time thinking about this stuff while working our actual jobs than people in the conference offices haha. 

I tweaked it a bit but largely agree.   The schedule should have been the following.   This whole thing reeks of front range shenanigans.  +++++ those guys.  Too damn bad they didn’t go and +++++ up the AAC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 8:54 AM, sactowndog said:

I tweaked it a bit but largely agree.   The schedule should have been the following.   This whole thing reeks of front range shenanigans.  +++++ those guys.  Too damn bad they didn’t go and +++++ up the AAC. 

Looks like we have the new BORG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that this sucks; fans care more about matchups with rivals than contrived matchups with teams that have been ranked by flawed formulae.

Here's another way, a better way, I think. Keep the same divisions and, for the last game of the season make it into a quasi-playoff:

Mtn 1 vs. Pac 2

Mtn 2 vs. Pac 1

Mtn 3 vs. Pac 4

Mtn 4 vs. Pac 3

Once you get outside the top 4, you match teams who have not played each other, aiming for evenly matched games, low costs (travel proximity), viewer interest and in an effort to balance everybody's home vs. away game schedule.

For the top 4, the home team is even numbers one year and odd numbers the next, unless the two teams met earlier in the season and then you switch home teams from that earlier game. After that last game, then you pick the two highest rated teams for the Championship Game.

Advantages:

1. we get to keep our regional rivalries

2. we probably do a better job of determining the top two teams for the Championship Game

3. we often increase the strength of schedule for the top two teams as their last pre-Championship Game win is a quality win against a top rated team from the other division.

4. the four "semi-finalist" teams will be appealing television games so our broadcasters will like the idea. They can be hyped, played back-to-back, and might get on a more widely visible network than they otherwise might.

There you have it. Yoda for Commissioner!

____________________________________________...

After deleting some of my posts and closing the offending SteveAztec thread, a couple of elites have been able to open it long enough to respond to me anyway.  And since I can’t respond on a closed thread, here is my response…

Other than the initial inquiry, this has never been about letting Steve post again; I doubt that he even wants to post here.  My complaint is about his treatment on this board and the failure of admins to control attacks on him – and worse, to sometimes participate in those attacks.

Steve was first banned on the SDSU board.  When he was banned, it was a sufficiently controversial that they started what became an 8 page thread on the topic to justify the decision (https://aztecmesa.proboards.com/thread/9747/steve-aztec-longer-member-board).  It is clear that Steve had support in the community and there was some criticism for the Board Administrators for having failed to “expel the dozens of people who've been taunting him.”  (And take a look at the thread that I bumped; initially it was supporters happy about Steve getting a radio show.  Then the haters arrived.)

I can’t say if Steve took it too far in response, but I will say that he denies most of various accusations and adds important missing context to others.  But I wasn’t a party to any of the events and can’t say who is in the right and who is in the wrong.  And I have to admit that if half of what has been said about him is true, depending on context, I might well have banned him too.  Or more likely I might have banned those who were taunting him.  (Steve had lost a brother-in-law to suicide and there have been a number of memes of people blowing their brains out, as well as posts blaming Steve or his sister for the suicide – and admins apparently let it go.)

I am in no position to evaluate the truth or falsity of the laundry list of claims made on this board about how Steve responded to all this.  My complaint, however, is about his treatment on this board.  I may be wrong, but his banning on this board at least appears to have been less about what he did on this board and more a carryover from the SDSU banning.  The same taunting continued – more suicide memes – apparently ignored by the admins. Utenation supposedly posted the first and it is explained away because he didn’t know about the suicide.  But was the post taken down?  Was an apology issued?   Indeed, for years, admins on this board have allowed Steve to be vilified based on little more than anecdotal hearsay.  This is a privately owned board, but it is not a private board – anyone can join.  And more than that, It’s not an anonymous board; people know who Steve.  You have a duty to protect your posters from libelous statements and unproven allegations -- especially when, having been banned themselves, they have no ability to defend themselves.

Even Retrofade (who says he’s not a mod but can post to closed threads) put up a “blowing his brains out” meme several years ago.  He knew that Steve lost his brother-in-law to suicide, and he now says that “Steve is a mentally disturbed individual”, which is libelous by the way, but excuses his meme as nothing more than being in “poor taste”.  Apparently it is okay with the board's current admins to taunt a "mentally disturbed person" because the post has never been taken down.  The poster has never been admonished.  And there has been no apology, unless you consider "he deserved it" to be an apology.

In my view, you owe Steve an apology for the treatment that you have tolerated and, in some cases, engaged in.  A former Aztec board went out of business when sued (not by Steve).  It won’t be the last one.  You need to fix this.  You need to administer your board and prevent libelous and incendiary attacks -- hearsay-- on posters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 10:21 AM, Wyovanian said:

Wyo record v AFA 26-30. First game played 1957.

Wyo record v USU 27-40. First game played 1903.

 

Hey, leave facts like more games and a difference of 5 decades out of this. BTW, who would actually WANT AFA as their guaranteed game? I would be pissed about that arrangement. I look forward to finally having a 1 year break from them, finally a year without the unique game prep and worrying about which D-lineman won't make it past that game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...