Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

....and it needs to start in Texas....

Texas State and UTSA are going to grow a lot faster than people think, and they're both excellent schools to add. The Mountain West made a great move when they added TCU, and now they need to go back and pick up 2 more Texas schools...

Read more: http://www.mwcboard.com/index.php?s=b1ba6774cbb6316c8d65b49e6cf26b99&showtopic=48026

Posted

No one mentioned UNT ... not even in a negative light. I'm fine with that. We're currently in no position to be a draw for any other conference. Even if we become a yearly top 20 team I don't see us changing conferences unless there's more massive upheaval in the future.

  • Upvote 2
Posted (edited)

I see no benefit whatsoever to Texas State and I think UTSA's attendance will fall as the team struggles. Maybe UTSA will show the world and come in firing, but I don't see it.

I'm not suggesting we're any great pick up either, though.

All about UTEP.

Edited by meangreener
  • Upvote 3
Posted

UTEP has been passed over numerous times. I just don't see a need for MWC to expand to Texas,which is not in their footprint,nor for UNT to move to MWC if invited.Time zones are an issue,and our fans don't travel as it is.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Posted (edited)

UTEP has been passed over numerous times. I just don't see a need for MWC to expand to Texas,which is not in their footprint,nor for UNT to move to MWC if invited.Time zones are an issue,and our fans don't travel as it is.

I agree. I think we say NO to the MWC, if for whatever absurd reason they asked.

Edited by meangreener
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 4
Posted

Right, because why would we ever want to actually move up the college football food chain?

We should just be happy being the 11 or 12th best program in Texas. We should just thank our lucky stars that CUSA was charitable enough to include us with UTSA.

It amazes me how fans of this program are consistently satisfied with so little.

  • Upvote 9
  • Downvote 3
Posted (edited)

It's not about not wanting to move up. It's about the MWC being the same as CUSA but with travel and unknown opponents.

The MWC is hardly the same as CUSA. They didn't go desperate and invite FCS teams to join their conference. They waited and got Boise St. back. They are 4 times the basketball conference than the new CUSA. They are 3 times the football conference.

MWC enabled TCU to make the move to the club. CUSA has done that for no one.

They are hardly the same.

Edited by UNT90
  • Upvote 8
  • Downvote 3
Posted

If the MWC approached UNT, we would/should be gone in a heartbeat.

"We've already gone West before and blah, blah, blah". This MWC is not the same as the Big West.

Simple facts:

The BCS busters consistently come out of the MWC

The MWC network payout is larger

The MWC is viewed by just about everyone as the best conference not in the "gang of 5".

The MWC is stable.

But, that invite has not come, and we are in C-USA. I'm very excited about that.

All of these things plus the great BB and BB credits the MWC gets. The MWC has Boise for football which will get them alot of BCS appearances, but the rest of the schools are not anymore appealing than CUSA in football and much further away. But for schools in the gang of 5, BB credits is where the money is to be made and the MWC has that.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

Screw the MWC. When we were in the Big West it sucked going out west all the time.

Besides, we are in a new conference.

We made about a dozen trips total in four years and I was glad that we had them because we would have had pure hell trying to play an independent schedule.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

Classic shortsightedness of people who think like fans and not like businessmen..

Anyone want to tell me how you convince the front range schools to vote for two Texas teams when it will substantially boost their travel away from their historical fan-bases, interfere with their start times and take Boise, and their Boise tv revenue clause, out of their side of the conference.

The MWC is staying where they are until they find a way to significantly increase their TV revenue and adding UTSA and TSU (or even UNT) will not be enough now to make it worthwhile for all parties involved.

  • Upvote 3
Posted

The MWC is hardly the same as CUSA. They didn't go desperate and invite FCS teams to join their conference. They waited and got Boise St. back. They are 4 times the basketball conference than the new CUSA. They are 3 times the football conference.

MWC enabled TCU to make the move to the club. CUSA has done that for no one.

They are hardly the same.

This.

MWC is better than every conference, not in the AQ, and in some years, it has been better than the ACC. I'm not sure that it won't be better than the Big XII this year. The MWC's bottom teams are terrible, but their top teams are usually very good. I still believe that BYU will make their way back into that league in the next few years and that they will add teams in Texas, probably upwards of three teams. I suspect that UTEP, especially if they can get UH and SMU to go with them, will be your next move in the conference realignment game. That AAC is just a trainwreck waiting to happen and 16 team conferences will soon become the norm. IF SMU wants to stay with their private friends and Eastern schools in the AAC, then the MWC will have to look hard at either UNT or UTSA. My guess is that by then, UTSA will either be the clear choice to invite or to ignore.

We deserve to be where we are in the FBS pecking order. The MWC would have gladly taken us if we had done anything since Dickey's run ended in 2004, especiallya s a our hoops team was getting stronger. Now, we offer them nothing at all. And, frankly, if SMU hadn't moved to the AAC, we would be stuck in the SBC still, so I suppose it could've been worse. But we have no one to blame but ourselves now--the university's cultural view of football has been too tough to defeat; its what the "family" has wanted.

  • Upvote 1
Posted (edited)

This.

MWC is better than every conference, not in the AQ, and in some years, it has been better than the ACC. I'm not sure that it won't be better than the Big XII this year. The MWC's bottom teams are terrible, but their top teams are usually very good. I still believe that BYU will make their way back into that league in the next few years and that they will add teams in Texas, probably upwards of three teams. I suspect that UTEP, especially if they can get UH and SMU to go with them, will be your next move in the conference realignment game. That AAC is just a trainwreck waiting to happen and 16 team conferences will soon become the norm. IF SMU wants to stay with their private friends and Eastern schools in the AAC, then the MWC will have to look hard at either UNT or UTSA. My guess is that by then, UTSA will either be the clear choice to invite or to ignore.

We deserve to be where we are in the FBS pecking order. The MWC would have gladly taken us if we had done anything since Dickey's run ended in 2004, especiallya s a our hoops team was getting stronger. Now, we offer them nothing at all. And, frankly, if SMU hadn't moved to the AAC, we would be stuck in the SBC still, so I suppose it could've been worse. But we have no one to blame but ourselves now--the university's cultural view of football has been too tough to defeat; its what the "family" has wanted.

Absolutley, untjim1995, we are exactly what our program's progesss (or lack thereof) has us. If not for our school's DFW location we would have really been in bad shape with even the new CUSA no matter how it has shaken out.

I will get the white flag out and get ready to start waving the darn thing, though, if TSU-Aquarena Springs or even UTSA gets a MWC invite, though. If the MWC comes to Texas, I still think UH and/or SMU gets first dibbs on that one based on their old SWC connection.

GMG!

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
  • Upvote 2
Posted

Classic shortsightedness of people who think like fans and not like businessmen..

Anyone want to tell me how you convince the front range schools to vote for two Texas teams when it will substantially boost their travel away from their historical fan-bases, interfere with their start times and take Boise, and their Boise tv revenue clause, out of their side of the conference.

The MWC is staying where they are until they find a way to significantly increase their TV revenue and adding UTSA and TSU (or even UNT) will not be enough now to make it worthwhile for all parties involved.

Yes!

  • Upvote 1
Posted (edited)

We deserve to be where we are in the FBS pecking order. The MWC would have gladly taken us if we had done anything since Dickey's run ended in 2004, especiallya s a our hoops team was getting stronger. Now, we offer them nothing at all. And, frankly, if SMU hadn't moved to the AAC, we would be stuck in the SBC still, so I suppose it could've been worse. But we have no one to blame but ourselves now--the university's cultural view of football has been too tough to defeat; its what the "family" has wanted.

There is no pressure to be anything else. Where else could the most anticipated basketball season in school history be wrecked by a rookie coach who couldn't, and every big money donor line up in support behind the guy? Where else could there be no pressure on an AD that made that hire, let alone Dodge and Stephens? Where else could fans post that they didn't want to be in a far superior conference because the team would have to travel more (and they couldn't drive to most away games.)

We basically want a high school program here. And, for the most part, we have gotten what we have asked.... maybe a better word is settled....for.

If you don't take yourself seriously, no one else will, either.

Edited by UNT90
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Posted

Good God People! Who care about travel! It would be a far better conference. Only if there was an example of a team from the DFW area that benefited from the move to the MWC........If anyone

thinks that Cusa and MWC are on the same level now are only kidding themselves. I know in the next few years we can position ourselves to be sitting pretty in the next round of realignment, but we

can't settle for what we have now. Yes, cusa is a great place to be, and no we haven't positioned oursleves well in the best, but travel should be the least of our worries.

  • Upvote 2
Posted

There is no pressure to be anything else. Where else could the most anticipated basketball season in school history be wrecked by a rookie coach who couldn't, and every big money donor line up in support behind the guy? Where else could there be no pressure on an AD that made that hire, let alone Dodge and Stephens? Where else could fans post that they didn't want to be in a far superior conference because the team would have to travel more (and they couldn't drive to most away games.)

We basically want a high school program here. And, for the most part, we have gotten what we have asked.... maybe a better word is settled....for.

If you don't take yourself seriously, no one else will, either.

UNT90, you absolutely nailed it! What a shame that, after all these years of football, we have a marginal fan base, no real money coming into the athletic dept. from the masses of result driven fans, no fan base that has a financial voice in matters that would send RV packing.

UNT should be in position for any offer that might come from the MWC. Mountain West wants to be in the Texas market (recruiting), then what better place than UNT and the DFW area! Tx State = San Marcos. Whoopee! UTSA = San Antonio. A real threat, plus they have a real athletic director and seemingly great support from the community.

CUSA is a good place to be, for now. But CUSA has taken a huge hit whit ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa exiting soon. When need to push for the MWC to take us seriously.

Posted

I don't know what to think about the MWC. It does have its advantages, but I still think if the gang of five actually form a super NCAA division, the second tier school's advantage will be local rivalries in the same time zone. I can't help but think that there will be a place for real college football as the big guys become nothing more than farm teams and training camps for the pros. Rivalries are made, for the most part, locally with the ability to drive, or hopefully some day, take public transportation to games. I really do not want our away games to be too far away to attend.

Posted

Right, because why would we ever want to actually move up the college football food chain?

We should just be happy being the 11 or 12th best program in Texas. We should just thank our lucky stars that CUSA was charitable enough to include us with UTSA.

It amazes me how fans of this program are consistently satisfied with so little.

What makes you think the MWC is that big of a step up?New Mexico,UNLV,Wyoming,San Jose State,etc.? The Big West did not work for us because of the reasons I posted. Time and Travel. The MWC may have Boise,but who from North Texas would go to a game their?50,100 fans or so?This Board,regardless of whether or not I agree with opinions posted,is a prime example of why people are no longer satisfied "with so little".We actually care what happens,and from a longtime fan thats a BIG change from my freshman year of 1961.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

This is a mute conversation. I have not heard any chatter about the MWC wanting anything to do with Texas. Conferences seem to be wanting to move together to carve out rivalries and attendance - oh wait, that's what we did!

Love me some CUSA.

Time to compete in it. Work to dominate.

GMG

  • Upvote 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.