How SMU stacks up to potential MWC candidates

[CalallenStang]

http://www.mwcboard.com/www/forums/inde ... opic=24374

Shows rankings based upon several criteria.

On page two of that topic, a Frog added up all of the "points" on a "lowest is better" method and it yielded this:

1. SMU 35 points
2. Fresno State 37
3. Hawaii 41
4. Houston 42
5. UTEP 54
6. Tulsa 58
7. Nevada 70
8. Boise 72

[ponyboy]

Minor nitpick. To suggest that Houston has more history than us is ridiculous, whether that's history directly with TCU or overall history.

[CalallenStang]

Minor nitpick. To suggest that Houston has more history than us is ridiculous, whether that's history directly with TCU or overall history.

A UNLV fan wrote the original post so they were probably thinking Phi Slamma Jamma.

[ponyboy]

Makes sense, but the Pony Express alone had more impact than Phi Slamma Jamma. Not to mention Doak, Dandy Don, etc.

[SMUstang]

SMU shouldn't be interested anyway if Utah and BYU are gone.

[SMUstang]

SMU shouldn't be interested anyway if Utah and BYU are gone.

[CalallenStang]

SMU shouldn't be interested anyway if Utah and BYU are gone.

Agreed, but what about no Utah, but BYU still there?

[EastStang]

UU doesn't travel as well as AFA and BYU. If they leave, not a big deal. If BYU leaves along with UU, big deal. But that also means a break-up of the Airport 5 which means that the MWC will not be the plantation it once was. If BYU and UU stayed, I would be very leary of the MWC. If the MWC expands to say 12, you will have the Airport 5 in one division along with probably UNLV, and the rest in the red-eyed step child division. That means AFA and BYU every four years in Dallas. Do you really want to play Boise, TCU, SDS, UNM and two other former WAC or CUSA west teams?

[West Coast Johnny]

This post opitomizes what I hate about conference realignment. Of the 12 criteria used to evaluate teams, only 2 of the criteria focus on athletic performance. The other 10 have to do with markets, enrollment, and turf color.

Hey College Conferences! Its about Athletics. If you promote colleges like Rutgers & Missouri that have long history of sucking it, your product is going to suck! Promote quality sports programs. Ignore markets, money, enrollment numbers, academics.

[gostangs]

no - you are incorrect. It is only about which markets generate the most revenue. Performance will follow once they decide who generates the biggest pie - since everyone else will be outside looking in.

[Sam I Am]

When SMU was in the WAC, there just wasn't any connection with the other schools like we have in the CUSA. Unless a school can break into the BCS, changing into far flung Western USA conferences doesn't hep SMU.

[CalallenStang]

When SMU was in the WAC, there just wasn't any connection with the other schools like we have in the CUSA. Unless a school can break into the BCS, changing into far flung Western USA conferences doesn't hep SMU.

MWC makes more money than CUSA and is closer than CUSA is to BCS inclusion.

[Water Pony]

Until the Big Boys (BCS cartel) determine their moves, i.e. if Big Ten expands by one or more, if Big XII needs to back-fill at all, if PAC-10 feels a need to go to 12 and if Big East FB survives the worst case scenario, our time on the clock will not start.

It is feeling like any or all of the above won't occur at time soon.