TennesseeBoyintheRockies

The NCAA won't certify a new bowl game unless one of the current bowls loses its certification. That's why the Los Angeles-based Christmas Bowl and the Orlando-based Cure Bowl were denied certification for the 2010 season. There isn't a higher demand for more bowl games at this time, and last I checked, there's not a bowl game scheduled to lose certification though there's beliefs that the Humanitarian Bowl could end by 2014.

You're right about the Mountain West waiting for better candidates, but it's not because of whatever Texas A&M does. It's because the TV contract is to be renegotiated, and the NBC/Comcast merger could play a huge role in a better contract. The only thing is that this merger isn't finalized and it could take from two weeks to a months before it is.

A heckuva' lotta' digging.

The Mountain West Conference isn't completely finished in its ability to push for BC$ status. There's a reason for the rumors of the league going to 14 or 16. The timing of Texas's $300 million contract announcement couldn't have worked out better. The Mountain West is hoping for a nice television contract that could come from the Comcast/NBC merger. Comcast owns half of the Mountain West Sports Network. This could possibly attract some of the current Big XII teams away--notably Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State--and fuel an argument for a MWC automatic bid as ongoing talks of possible inclusion of the Cotton Bowl into the BC$ intensifies.

Some things are easier said out of the presence of certain people.

The Mountain West knows that it won't be able to land Houston or SMU. That's why USU and UTEP are the top two targets. The fact that San Jose State is getting any mention has to do with UTEP not being fully committed to the move. The Mountain West is reviewing what school of who all is out there could bring the most to the conference and still allow it to achieve its goals. San Jose State's name is being mentioned as is North Texas'. However, the Mountain West has repeatedly expressed its desire to keep a positioning in the state of Texas after the loss of TCU. San Jose State won't be able to do that. The Bay Area is a very good market to sell, but it's not Texas. It really looks like the MWC 12th member will either be UTEP or North Texas.

It's the Bay Area market which San Jose State wouldn't be able to deliver, but the other Mountain West schools would. The Bay Area has an enormous affinity for the Mountain West Conference.

Belt doesn't need to add La Tech. Without them, the league is at ten members (plus South Alabama). If UNT is invited to another league, the Sun Belt is at nine members (plus South Alabama) which is even better for football conference schedules. Another reason why the SBC isn't jumping on the expansion train right now. No, I think Louisiana Tech will stay in the more Central Time Zone-friendly WAC.

You are exactly right. The only reason why the Mountain West is looking at San Jose State is to determine the market value of San Jose against El Paso and Dallas-Fort Worth. About your point saying that Craig Thomspon is pushing the Mountain West to keep a foothold in Texas? You are right again. The MWC has affirmed its desire to stay in the Lone Star State, and it is trying its darndest to get UTEP, but they are also looking at North Texas. I have reason to believe that UNT will wind up in the Mountain West before San Jose State unless the league is able to pull in UTEP which is still at the negotiation table despite what the Miner fans are saying. There's a reason why the Sun Belt hasn't just reached out to invite New Mexico State like many have wondered. It's because Wright Waters knows that there's a good chance that the league footprint's western most point could be Lafayette, Louisiana after 2012. For that reason, there is no justification for the SBC to expand more to the West.

Only this time the Mountain West and CUSA aren't demanding more. They are manipulating the current system in order to get more. This could be very bad news for every school not associated with an AQ conference, the new Mountain West, or Conference USA.

Yes, it has. It's part of the reason why Temple is sitting at home with an 8-4 record.

It was 1996. North Texas finished 3-2 in the Big West standings (good enough for a 2-way tie for third with Idaho). Idaho finished with a better overall record, but UNT won that head-to-head to claim the 3rd place tie-breaker. The Mean Green lost a close 21-13 decision to Utah State in Logan. UNT's other league loss came a week earlier to Nevada-Reno in Denton. USU and and Nevada tied for the league's top position claiming co-champinships in that seasons both possessing 4-1 league records. Nevada knocked off Utah State but lost to Idaho in the regular season. If UNT could have beaten Utah State, the Mean Green would've had sole possession of second place in the Big West, but a Big West title would've been won with a win over Nevada-Reno as well.

The year was 1999 (the second to last season for the Big West). North Texas under second-year head coach, Darrell Dickey, finished 2-9 on the season. One of those wins was against Texas Tech in Lubbock. The Red Raiders did not go to a bowl game, but the other team that UNT beat did. UNT beat Boise State in Denton 17-10 on October 16, 1999. Boise had only two previous losses to UCLA and Hawaii. Despite the losses, Boise still won the Big West Conference title and finished the year off at 10-3 capped by a Humanitarian Bowl victory over the Louisville Cardinals--an affiliate of Conference USA at the time.

This is a very interesting proposition, as well, and one I haven't really considered. If UNT is offered a Mountain West invitation to directly replace TCU in the Dallas/Fort Worth market, I would be very surprised if that was turned down. The level of competition and notoriety of the Mountain West even without TCU, Utah, and BYU is far more credible then any other non-Power $ix league.

Not at all surprising! Craig Thompson is posturing the Mountain West in preparation for the loss of TCU's football program to the Big East. The Mountain West will also add two additional members to get to 12 teams. Utah State may be one of the teams considered, but there's rumors floating out of Colorado Springs that Houston and UTEP will be the final two to join.

The WAC is in more trouble than Karl Benson wants people to believe. If you saw the announcement by Montana to remain in the Big Sky, the reasons Montana president, Royce Engstrom, gave for not joining the WAC eludes to the fact that Montana saw the WAC to be incredibly unattractive (like an ugly girlfriend) and gave reasons for not getting into the relationship without hurting the WAC's feelings. Engstrom said there were three reasons Montana stayed in the Big Sky: 1. It wanted to retain it's rivalry with Montana State every year. The WAC was willing to bend over backwards to assure Montana had that right. This is not a good reason not to join the WAC. 2. It wanted to compete against schools with similar academic missions. Montana's academic standards are no better or worse than many other WAC schools. Montana is a public school like many other WAC members. The academic missions are virtually the same. This is not a good reason not to join the WAC. 3. It wanted to retain the integrity and prestige the program had demonstrated. Montana would've dominated the WAC from Day 1, and everyone knows it. No one would've doubted Montana's integrity or prestige as a good athletics program especially in football. The only issue that could be seen is that people might question Montana's integrity for joining a conference that is far worse in perception than any other conference in the Football Bowl Subdivision. This would support the belief that beginning in 2012, the WAC truly will be THE worst conference in Division 1 FBS. It would also support the belief that the future of the WAC is the most uncertain of any conference in Division 1 FBS. Boise, Fresno, and Nevada leaving the WAC was the first clue that the WAC was reaching a monumental low. BYU's consequential decision to not join the WAC after this took place was the second clue. The third clue was when the WAC decided to add Texas State and UTSA for football. This showed that beggar's can't be choosers and the desperation of the WAC became apparent. The fourth clue came literally within hours after the announcement of UTSA and Texas State's acceptance to the WAC when the New Mexico Bowl announced that they were dropping the WAC as an affiliate in order to pick up the 7th-place PAC-12 team to face a Mountain West affiliate. The fifth clue came today when Montana rejected the WAC invitation to remain in the Big Sky under the reasons cited by Montana. This is not the end. Within the next year or so, Hawaii is going to announce their decision to leave the WAC. Hawaii was already seriously contemplating leaving the WAC. With the loss of Boise, Fresno, and Nevada, Hawaii's already previous senior membership looks even more daunting when the next in line is San Jose State followed by Louisiana Tech. These recent developments are only going to hasten their decision to get out. The WAC as we know it is no longer the conference Hawaii joined in 1979--not even close. Also, as we all may have presumed, once Hawaii leaves, the WAC also will lose the Hawaii Bowl. I have to hand your AD credit, friends of North Texas. He may not have seen this level of destruction coming when UNT turned down the WAC a few years back when Utah State and New Mexico State joined, but he has to be feeling a degree of confidence seeing that UNT could be in the middle of this mess today rather than enjoying stability and better perception in the Sun Belt.

From everything I've seen and heard, the former Big 12 Conference is looking to strengthen its basketball image. Houston would be on the short list for expansion, but they'd be behind BYU and Memphis. BYU was one of the schools greatly considered for charter membership when the Big 12 formed in 1996. BYU has the strongest basketball tradition of the remaining Mountain West members. Memphis, of course, brings more than just a multi-million dollar sponsor in Federal Express and the Liberty Bowl, but they also have the strongest basketball program in Conference USA. IF, the "Big 12 Conference" does decide to expand to twelve members (and that's a BIG if), you can bet any new members will have very solid basketball.

Nah! I just felt compelled to express my feelings about BYU. I will be starting graduate school there in Exercise Science within the next year and a half after completing my bachelor's here at Adams State. With that said, I really do like what North Texas is doing to position itself in the landscape of intercollegiate athletics. I'm very familiar with UNT. I've watched the school progress in the days it was a member of the Big West Conference. UNT has come such a long way in a relatively short time. North Texas' Graduate School of Chemistry advertises at our school. One of our better graduates is attending graduate school at UNT as we speak. As far as I've last heard, he just completed his first year in Denton. UNT's a good school. That's why I think the WAC will eventually court North Texas again to essentially be a savior to the league. UNT would be in a much better position to do so at this point.

The WAC will make another run at North Texas. With fewer members and less Boise State, the WAC is wide open for the taking and more revenue distributions would be available. So much has changed across the landscape of college athletics since the old WAC super-conference and Southwest and Big West Conference dissolving. Also, North Texas could leave without putting the Sun Belt's existence at risk. This was not the case in 2004. Other Sun Belt members were willing to follow North Texas if they left. This is very much like what we saw recently with Texas and the Big 12. Now, UNT is in a much better position to bolt for the WAC. Believe it or not, it the return investment in the WAC would likely profit UNT in the long run more than being in the Sun Belt. It's not just about travel and ability to compete. It's about exposure and maximizing your name.

The point being, BYU is a good school, and I know the leadership will not be angry or jealous of the University of Utah. Having been raised as a Southern Baptist for 29 years, I have seen so much hatred and religious intolerance expressed toward the Mormon Church. Without turning this into a religious discussion, I don't think it's fair to falsely judge the Mormons. Most of what is said out there are half-truths and completely false. I know this for a fact having played both sides of the field.

BYU will be just fine. They will still face the Utes every year just as before. BYU is a very good and respectable school for higher learning. I just visited the school about two and half weeks ago. You have to at least admire a university of this kind for taking the initiative to put our Heavenly Father first in all for which it stands. BYU is still the cheapest, largest private school in the country. Much of that has to do with the Church's ability to alleviate the costs to students (LDS and non-LDS alike). If a student refuses to at least try to live up to the Ecclesiastical Endorsement and Honor Code, then maybe they should look elsewhere. BYU is still the only non-AQ school to win the national title since the 1-A and 1-AA split. It has a great deal going for it.