New SWC

[Nacho]

Here's a new one:

<A HREF="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/sports/1912141" TARGET=_blank>www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/sports/1912141</A>

[Water Pony]

Nacho:

Good article, one to pull at the heart strings of old Ponies everywhere. But, Baylor won't give up the Big 12, the same way Northwestern and Vanderbilt won't give up the Big Ten or SEC.

Penn State going to the Big East makes sense with ND and Louisville throw in make the Big East bigger. ND would do it by being allowed to keep their own TV contract (major concession, but easy to do.) Louisville would jump and Penn State would be a bigger fish in this pond, while aligning with Pittsburgh. Perhaps throw in Cincinnati and you have a Big East combined with all of PA, the Ohio River schools and ND.

Then, whether Miami leaves or not, the Big East improves big time. For us and Rice (Tulsa, etc.), the new SWC is actually Conf. USA-West

[Nacho]

I like his basic concept. Every conference needs a whipping boy and Baylor is it for the Big 12. They are a bye week. They may eventually be forced out especially if a school like Iowa wants in. Re the new SWC I would keep Tulsa and possibly UTEP/NMSU and UNT.

[Sun Belt Jim]

The problem with this writers scenario, and the speculation from talk radio shows and internet boards all over this state, is that the Big 12 cant change its roster before 2008. Its in their conference charter, no one can leave, new members cant be added. Baylor cant be kicked out, Missouri cant decide to leave. In 2006, if Missouri or anyone else wants to move they have to give 2 years notice, and give up part of their conference revenue. It was set up that way to keep the conferences roster stable for at least the length of their TV contract. Right now there really isnt any mechanism to kick out any team, including Baylor, it goes against the conference constitution that all the schools signed. The legal and financial consequences of trying to do something like that would be substantial.
Alot of people bring up Temple in discussions about Baylor, but the situations are very different. Temple was a football only member of the Big East, and when they joined there were set criteria that they had to live up to. They didnt make it, so they were dropped. Baylor is a full member of the Big 12, one of the original signators of their conference charter, and there is no mechanism to force them to leave.

[Nacho]

Good point SBJ. What we need more than anything is for some eastern C-USA schools to go to the BE. Then we can go regional and have some fun. We won't be BCS but I think we can be viable, competitive and have some close road games.

[Charleston Pony]

I love the idea of a reformed SWC, but it needs to have at least 9 schools (4 home, 4 road games in conference scheduling). Baylor is not leaving the Big XII, at least no time soon; so in this next round of musical chairs, possible SWC schools include:

SMU, TCU, UNT, Tulsa, Ark St, La Tech, La-Laf, Tulane, Houston, Rice, UTEP & NMSU. Pick your favorite 9, or just bite the bullet, accept that we are all "mid-majors" and form the 12 school league now.

Of course, this is not likely to happen because everyone who commits to playing I-A football wants a piece of the BCS action, and the BCS committee appears ready to dangle a carrot in front of the "mid majors" by opening up a spot for the best program among the non-BCS conferences (soon to include the Big East). I don't see practical regional realignments necessarily coming out of this next round. We could see some strange relationships formed, all in the quest for inclusion in the BCS. That ultimately means more red ink for most.

[Mustangs35SMU]

Do we ever need some close road games! Lord Bring em closer now!

------------------
The Red And Blue Is Back! Let the Pony Pride Ride On The Hilltop!

[PK]

I don't know CP. Everyone seems to think a 12 school conference is a big deal because of the extra money a playoff game brings in, but that is only true if there is TV money involved. Given the 12 schools you listed, I don't think there would be much of a chance for TV money or at least not very much TV money.

Why not drop Ark St, La-Laf, & NMSU from your list and go with a nine member conference now. That would leave SMU, TCU, UNT, Tulsa, La Tech, Tulane, Houston, Rice & UTEP. We could probably work a deal for the bowl in Shreveport and the Fort Worth Bowl. Or drop one of the following: UNT, La Tech or Tulsa and add Baylor after they get booted out of the big xii at the end of 2008 (my understanding is that after 2008, teams can leave or be booted out of the big xii).

[Charleston Pony]

1st of all, none of the mid-major conferences are going to profit significantly from numbering 12 members and hosting a football championship. CUSA, arguably the best football mid-major, was being offered only $1 mil for such a game. It's not unlike these meaningless bowls that pay each participant $750k. They're great or the participants, but a limited number of people are interested on a national level. I do believe a 12 member conference is good for scheduling, reducing travel costs, building rivalries and promoting healhy competition in a conference. That's what life for the mid-majors is all about. The simple fact is that the group of schools mentioned are the closest geographically and like it or not, we are ALL frozen out of the BCS.

TCU might be in denial and believe otherwise, but it's why the SWC broke up & Big XII was formed, why the ACC is looking to expand, why Coach Fran bailed on TCU, etc... With a few fortunate exceptions, the BCS has turned college football into a world of "haves" and "have nots" and SMU (and TCU), because they are small private schools without huge fan bases, fall into the latter category.

I know that assessment will hurt TCU people who are very proud of their recent accomplishments, as they should be, but the truth is that most people who follow college sports in this country lump SMU & TCU together as very similar programs. Many TCU fans are in denial right now, thinking they might land a BCS invite, but when you have a program that goes to 5 consecutive bowls and still can't pack a 44,000 seat stadium, you ain't very attractive to the big boys who control I-A football.

[PK]

For the most part, I don't disagree with you CP. However, I still think the eight or nine member conference is better than a twelve. In the smaller conference you play the same teams every year and that is how rivalries will be made. In the 12 member conference, you will play some teams only once in every three years which means, they might as well be an OOC team and only an occassonal one at that. Ultimately, I hope we can put together a geographically based conference....after all these years, I still don't feel any significant rivalry with the west coast teams in the WAC.

[Charleston Pony]

I appreciate what you're saying about not feeling any rivalry with the WAC schools. The question is, who do we feel any rivalry with? Obviously TCU, but after that? Look at the WAC east schools and CUSA/SunBelt schools and ask yourself who might SMU fans come out to see? Maybe more important, what schools might have some of their fans attend a game if their alma mater was playing in Dallas? UNT might be as good a bet as there is after TCU. Houston & Rice are better than San Jose & Nevada. Tulsa is a nice bball opponent, but football isn't any bigger an attraction than Arkansas St or La-Lafayette would be, in my opinion. Those latter schools both draw pretty well in bball on their home courts.

When you start looking at CUSA, then La Tech looks better and better. Tulane has shown in the past they don't have any more support than we do. Memphis? So Miss? They are close enough to be more desireable to me than UTEP or NMSU, but just barely. Would we be anymore excited about hooking up with UAB, ECU & S.Fla than we are with Fresno, Boise & Hawaii? Those eastern programs aren't any better than our WAC opponents, but all are so far away that we will never feel any affinity.

It is fun to speculate, but there are no easy decisions to be made in all of this.

[Dement-ed]

So if the shakeup occurs that many people are predicting - including the exodus of several WAC teams to CUSA or the MWC, who are we legitimately left with?

SMU
UTEP
Tulsa
Rice
LaTech
San Jose State
and ....
La-Lafayette?
UNT?
New Mexico State?
Oral Roberts?

Ugh.

[MeanGreenGem]

CharlestonPony, we just ran a thread on GoMeanGreen.com 2 weeks ago as we ALL know there is not much else to do till 2-A-days, yet the thread posed the question: How many Mean Green fans would we travel to Ford Stadium for a football game against the Mustangs?

Now conference affiliation and all that kind of talk was not even mentioned as we should all appreciate the fact that that is really out of all our hands and will take place among university presidents and their board of trustees board rooms, who knows, maybe some of these discussions will even take place on a golf course somewhere.

The general consensus among our UNT posters was that we would bring anywhere up to 12,000 Mean Green fans to Ford Stadium, even more if both teams are equally competitive. I would look forward to it as I have yet to see your stadium in person. I have friends in the DFW sports media friends who have told me it is a palace, though.

Citizens from Denton and Denton County are more prone to do their leisure/recreation type entertainment in Dallas rather than Fort Worth. We did take a little over 5,000 to TCU last year (according to the TCU radio network fellas' estimate of our group); and we did that with a 1 and 2 record and a starting QB lost for the year 3 weeks earlier against the Texas Longhorns.

Truthfully, just named 2003 Playboy and CFN 1'st team All American, that is, UNT defensive lineman Brandon "Booger" Kennedy locked up Hall in a tackle during a practice session just a few days before the UT game and tore Hall's pectoral. Out: Scott Hall <><> Enter: Largely untested frosh' QB Andrew Smith.

Of course what SMU and UNT do in the traveling dept. always has to do with how good our teams are playing now doesn't it? UNT is on top of our game right now (as Phil Bennett will have yall soon enough--just keep on being patient).

I do know when I go to college football games I do like there to be fans/marching bands from the other school in whatever venue. It just makes for more of the good ol' college spirit thing or something. Hard to explain it, really, I just know I don't get that same feeling watching the NFL.
.............................................


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Charleston Pony:
[B]I appreciate what you're saying about not feeling any rivalry with the WAC schools. The question is, who do we feel any rivalry with? Obviously TCU, but after that? Look at the WAC east schools and CUSA/SunBelt schools and ask yourself who might SMU fans come out to see? Maybe more important, what schools might have some of their fans attend a game if their alma mater was playing in Dallas? UNT might be as good a bet as there is after TCU. Houston & Rice are better than San Jose & Nevada.


[This message has been edited by MeanGreenGem (edited 05-20-2003).]