PonyFans.com

...that TCU's claim for moving to the MWC was that the MWC was a stronger conference and yet while they could not win the C-USA championship out right, they have no problem doing so in MWC. Perhaps MWC is not all they thought it was...not to mention that a C-USA team, SMU, was the only one to beat them and we ain't all that great. Hmmmmm.

the decision makers at TCU thought moving to the MWC would take them one step closer to BCS inclusion and actually it's done just that. But for the loss to SMU, they might just be knocking on that door.

From what I've seen, Fresno looks like the best team out there from a non-BCS conference. Their only loss was a 3 pointer at Oregon (who also has only one loss...to USC)

and although they have jumped conferences quite often, I'm sure their decision was based on more than one year. So the jury might still be out...you think?

Meanwhile, SMU should be looking to find a replacement coach and can't because the coffers are so bare due to no success.

but you keep wondering why someone else makes changes. Makes it easier to look within

PK wrote:...that TCU's claim for moving to the MWC was that the MWC was a stronger conference and yet while they could not win the C-USA championship out right, they have no problem doing so in MWC. Perhaps MWC is not all they thought it was...not to mention that a C-USA team, SMU, was the only one to beat them and we ain't all that great. Hmmmmm.

Obviously the nation has more respect for the MWC than the new CUSA. See TCU being ranked for the majority of the season, while UTEP just became ranked.

The MWC kills CUSA on attendance, which is not something to be taken lightly if you're a conference that strives to get a BCS auto bid.

The computer polls say the MWC is stronger than CUSA, despite the MWC having somewhat of a down year.

The MWC conference is over .500 against schools from a BCS conference. CUSA is what, 2-18 or something ridiculous like that?

TCU makes more money in the MWC, because the TV deal pays more per team.

The MWC is more stable than CUSA. The MWC can grab Fresno, Boise, Nevada and possibly UTEP any time it wants. Most schools in CUSA East have openly lobbied for Big East membership.

Finally, despite the increased distances, MWC schools have brought just as many fans as the old CUSA schools, SMU, Rice or Tulsa ever did.

So tell me again why we'd regret it? Even in a down year, the MWC is preferable to the new CUSA. Its probably a lateral move from the OLD CUSA, but its hands down better than the new version.

As for the SMU win, it was a fluke against a young team who needed to learn how to handle the success of the OU win. If anyone thinks that the outcome would be anywhere close to the same if the two teams played next weekend, they're on drugs.

frog says: "If anyone thinks that the outcome would be anywhere close to the same if the two teams played next weekend, they're on drugs"

now THAT really doesn't matter, does it tadpole? fact is: we did win, you did lose. the "if" doesn't really matter.

frog says:

"Obviously the nation has more respect for the MWC than the new CUSA. See TCU being ranked for the majority of the season, while UTEP just became ranked."

If you take TCU out of the mix, the MWC has no ranked teams and currently not a single team has received a vote in any of the polls. As a matter of fact, no team has fewer than four losses. That's a recipe for mediocraty. Conference USA has one ranked team and three others receiving votes.

frog says:

"The computer polls say the MWC is stronger than CUSA, despite the MWC having somewhat of a down year."

Again if you take TCU out of the mix, there is no difference.

frog says:

"The MWC kills CUSA on attendance, which is not something to be taken lightly if you're a conference that strives to get a BCS auto bid."

Kills? Not really. 20K for TCUs games at San Diego State and Wyoming. Bigger crowds at BYU, fine. The average attendance of the MWC does surpass that of Conf USA, but we still have some schools with big fan bases-UTEP, ECU, UCF, Southern Miss, etc. If the MWC is striving to get the BCS auto bid (which every non-bcs conference wants), then compare your attendance to the BCS conferences, then you'll really understand the meaning of the word killed.

frog says:

"The MWC conference is over .500 against schools from a BCS conference"

Not true, MWC is 5-8, wins over Washington (2-8), Arizona (3-8), Ole Miss (3-6), Missouri (6-4), and of course OU.

frog says:

"TCU makes more money in the MWC, because the TV deal pays more per team."

not after you deduct the increase in travel costs in the current alignment of CUSA

frog says:

"The MWC is more stable than CUSA. The MWC can grab Fresno, Boise, Nevada and possibly UTEP any time it wants."

They've already done that in the past and it was a disaster, hence the big WAC breakup a few years ago. Besides, if they did so, wouldn't that decrease the TV payout per team (see above argument). Also, that would further increase your travel costs.

frog says:

"Finally, despite the increased distances, MWC schools have brought just as many fans as the old CUSA schools, SMU, Rice or Tulsa ever did. "

Probably an exaggeration. How many fans did UNLV bring last saturday? You only had 28K in attendance. Did they bring their band? SMU and Rice bring their bands. That enhances the atmosphere SMU may only bring 1-2K fans in a bad year, but your own fans take an interest in seeing the cross town rivals and this adds to the overall attendance.

I am happy for your success. You have strung together a good run of winning seasons and have increased your exposure and fan base and this is enviable. I must also say that I am a fan of the frogs as my wife is a TCU graduate and I attend a couple of games each year. However, if you see the MWC as some sort of promised land, then you may be in for a surprise.




[/i]