Boise to Mountain West Rumors

[CalallenStang]

But one could say that SMU is more attractive than Nevada, which would add almost no market. Plus, it has been shown that SMU is superior to Nevada in football.

The problem for SMU in that equation is that the MWC is trying to get BCS AQ status. They easily satisfy 2 of the 3 requirements (number of ranked teams and highest ranked team), but they are below the cutoff for the third requirement--average computer ranking of the teams in their conference.

Adding Boise State helps the MWC, but doesn't push them over the top. So, every team they add needs to boost their average in the 2008-2011 seasons. SMU had a solid season last year, but SMU's 2008 computer ranking would kill the MWC. Nevada had a winning record in both 2008 and 2009 and they played a decent nonconference schedule so their computer ranking is not bad (better than 5 of the 9 MWC teams).

The big question mark for the MWC is that the 2010 and 2011 results are not know yet of course. They have to guess which teams will do well over the next 2 seasons. The image of the Hawaii Bowl might help SMU there.

Your post is exactly why the MWC should cut ties with the schools at the bottom and add teams that are stronger. Replace SDSU with SMU, replace UNM with Houston, and run those calculations (plus Boise State) and you probably meet the third requirement.

The problem with the MWC is the bottom, not the top.

[FroggieFever]

Defensive move since UU is leaving. They would take Boise to get back to 9, not go to 10.

This, in all likely hood, will not happen.

Boise has NOT been offered. Presidents of MW meet in June. Also, Boise will likely be the only addition (crummy).

[FroggieFever]

But one could say that SMU is more attractive than Nevada, which would add almost no market. Plus, it has been shown that SMU is superior to Nevada in football.

The problem for SMU in that equation is that the MWC is trying to get BCS AQ status. They easily satisfy 2 of the 3 requirements (number of ranked teams and highest ranked team), but they are below the cutoff for the third requirement--average computer ranking of the teams in their conference.

Adding Boise State helps the MWC, but doesn't push them over the top. So, every team they add needs to boost their average in the 2008-2011 seasons. SMU had a solid season last year, but SMU's 2008 computer ranking would kill the MWC. Nevada had a winning record in both 2008 and 2009 and they played a decent nonconference schedule so their computer ranking is not bad (better than 5 of the 9 MWC teams).

The big question mark for the MWC is that the 2010 and 2011 results are not know yet of course. They have to guess which teams will do well over the next 2 seasons. The image of the Hawaii Bowl might help SMU there.

Your post is exactly why the MWC should cut ties with the schools at the bottom and add teams that are stronger. Replace SDSU with SMU, replace UNM with Houston, and run those calculations (plus Boise State) and you probably meet the third requirement.

The problem with the MWC is the bottom, not the top.

Vote has to be 100% and SDSU will not vote themselves out. There is "talks" of them dropping the program after their "evaluation" period is complete (2011).

[CalallenStang]

Vote has to be 100% and SDSU will not vote themselves out. There is "talks" of them dropping the program after their "evaluation" period is complete (2011).

Wow, BYU and UU both really screwed themselves when they set up the 100% provision. Getting SDSU, UNM, UNLV out and replacing them with better football programs is the MWC's only hope to move up to BCS.

I have heard that SDSU doesn't want to pay rent in Qualcomm anymore and they also don't want to build their own stadium.

[Water Pony]

Hawai'i expects Boise to leave:

http://www.starbulletin.com/sports/2010 ... dable.html

[FroggieFever]

Vote has to be 100% and SDSU will not vote themselves out. There is "talks" of them dropping the program after their "evaluation" period is complete (2011).

Wow, BYU and UU both really screwed themselves when they set up the 100% provision. Getting SDSU, UNM, UNLV out and replacing them with better football programs is the MWC's only hope to move up to BCS.

I have heard that SDSU doesn't want to pay rent in Qualcomm anymore and they also don't want to build their own stadium.

No kidding. There are stipulations that can force members to manipulate a vote but it doesn't apply here. "band of brothers"

[EastStang]

Remember that politics can enter in this as well. Will SDSU have to vote against Boise because Fresno wasn't offered? Will UNLV have to vote against expansion because UN wasn't offered? Given that VT pulled this move, I would not be surprised to other states follow that lead. So, it may be that they have to expand to 12 but add Boise, Fresno and Nevada to get unanimity which could blow up their conference. If that happened, I could see TCU walking.

[Water Pony]

Remember that politics can enter in this as well. Will SDSU have to vote against Boise because Fresno wasn't offered? Will UNLV have to vote against expansion because UN wasn't offered? Given that VT pulled this move, I would not be surprised to other states follow that lead. So, it may be that they have to expand to 12 but add Boise, Fresno and Nevada to get unanimity which could blow up their conference. If that happened, I could see TCU walking.

I can see where the Frogs would not want BSU, NV and Fresno. TCU is isolated in the Central Time Zone now and it would be even worse with only Boise being a major upgrade for the MWC.

[davidpaul123]

Remember that politics can enter in this as well. Will SDSU have to vote against Boise because Fresno wasn't offered? Will UNLV have to vote against expansion because UN wasn't offered? Given that VT pulled this move, I would not be surprised to other states follow that lead. So, it may be that they have to expand to 12 but add Boise, Fresno and Nevada to get unanimity which could blow up their conference. If that happened, I could see TCU walking.

I can see where the Frogs would not want BSU, NV and Fresno. TCU is isolated in the Central Time Zone now and it would be even worse with only Boise being a major upgrade for the MWC.

another reason they would have interest in us joining them in the MWC

[Frog Barrister]

No no no no. The MWC isn't going to 12 teams anytime soon. And in the race for spots 11 & 12 it's currently Fresno Houston Nevada UTEP/SMU in that order. But it's all moot because there won't be a 12 team MWC.

[reddevil]

Can someone explain how anyone could think SMU and UTEP would bring the same benefits to a new conference. The only attractive thing that UTEP would bring to the MWC is geographical proximity. What am I missing?

[EastStang]

The other problem with Boise joining the MWC is that it almost certainly will cause no team to get into the BCS round robin in the future. Think about it, TCU, UU, BYU, AFA, and Boise will take turns beating each other up. So, unless Boise puts them instantly over the top, they won't want Boise. Also, once you get above 9, you get the Airport Al 5 issue rearing its ugly head which is that CSU, AFA, BYU, UU and Wyo want to play each other EVERY year. If UU is gone, that is not a problem. There is one other non-BCS program that hasn't been mentioned that has some BCS points laying out there. Hawaii. As much as it would pain them to invite Hawaii (ahead of any practical program), they might invite Hawaii to get the points if it puts them over the top. Hawaii has been a top half performer in the WAC most years in the past 6 (mostly due to JJ). And now that JJ is gone, if that puts them over the top, they get a team in the MWC that they can beat. I think the MWC members can put politics aside to invite one or two teams if that puts them over the top for BCS. Again, let me be clear. I don't want to be in the MWC unless it is an auto-bid conference. I am not going to subscribe to the joining and hoping crowd. If they become an auto-bid conference (remembering that the powers that be DO NOT WANT THEM IN), then I would love an invite. I would love an invite from any auto-bid conference.

[NavyCrimson]

I still can't get over the fact that the mountain goats ditched UTEP during the break up being that they were a longtime member. Talking about turning on your own once your back is turned?!

EastStang: "I don't want to be in the MWC unless it is an auto-bid conference." Couldn't have said it any better!

[Garret]

There is one other non-BCS program that hasn't been mentioned that has some BCS points laying out there. Hawaii. As much as it would pain them to invite Hawaii (ahead of any practical program), they might invite Hawaii to get the points if it puts them over the top. Hawaii has been a top half performer in the WAC most years in the past 6 (mostly due to JJ).

I would *love* for Hawaii to go from the WAC to the MWC. However, the sad reality is that the ONLY years that count for the BCS AQ calculation are 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. Hawaii's computer rankings for 2008 (7-7 with a weak schedule) and 2009 (6-7 with a weak schedule) are FAR below what the MWC needs to become a BCS AQ conference.

If Hawaii could count JJ's 2006 season (strong schedule, good record) and 2007 season instead of 2008 and 2009, Hawaii would be attractive to the MWC. However, the rules only count 2008-2011. Four preseason publications are now out (Phil Steele, Sporting News, etc.) and Hawaii is predicted to end up between 5th and 8th in the WAC this year...even a 5th place finish would mean that Hawaii would NOT have a good computer ranking (unless it swept the nonconference games including USC).

[lwjr]

This is fun to talk about, but until it actually happens, I do not believe it is going to happen.