PonyFans.com

Stallion...wait. I'm not trying to say that SMU has any ability to be banging on conferences doors. I'm just wondering is a rehashed CUSA w/ two divisions is currently our BEST option out there. I don't see how it can't be as long as we get back in w/ TCU,Houston,Tulane,USM,etc.

Kurt

I don't think there is any doubt it is our best option, plus it is in a geographical region that makes sense- a Conference of the South-and I think that regional identity will make it easier to develop rivalries and interest plus more natural segmented audience for TV and bowls to choose from. BTW the conference might also have schools like South Florida, East Carolina, Central Florida and Alabama-Birmingham depending on the shakeups in the BE, ACC and CUSA.

We have no "options." Best "result" would be for TCU, Houston, and Tulane to join the WAC. The WAC could then split East and West with a championship game in Vegas. Assuming all Western WAC schools stayed (particularly the ones that win football games like Fresno, Boise St., and Hawaii), we'd have a decent league and our regional issues and travel costs would be addressed. Also, by staying put, we'd avoid an entry fee which will likely be required if we join CUSA. I think this result is possible but far from likely, and it would be the best result from my perspective.

I still see TCU going to the MWC if CUSA is depleted. They make more sense for a BCS run than adding Nevada or Boise to the MWC. In that case, we have a problem and our best hope would be positioning ourselves with TCU as their travel partner. Failing that, we might be facing a SWC II without TCU, which wouldnt have any BCS or playoff chance to speak of.

TCU will never get the votes for inclusion in the MWC-everybody has a hat in the ring. Nevada will have UNLV and Nevada legislators pulling strings. SDSU will be pulling strings for Fresno. The MWC looks like a great option until you get out a MAP and start calculating the costs to send the Men's BB Team and Women's Volleyball Team etc to those locations NONE OF WHICH ARE WITHIN A THOUSAND MILES AWAY. It would be financially devastating to TCU. At least 2 Presidents of that Conference's teams will be smart enough to realize that TCU in the MWC makes no rational sense. If they do make that truly STUPID move then they will be paying their 5th confence entry fees in about 5 more years. As for the WAC option I would love to add TCU, U Houston, Tulane and even Southern Miss-unfortunately once again SMU will not be calling the shots-and those teams are in a conference where they will be able to keep exit fees and BB Tourney credits and since they have better ties with TVs and Bowls they will call the shots and instead form a revamped CUSA made up of teams from the South.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 07-01-2003).]

Maybe, but the quest for BCS inclusion is a powerful drug. Rational and reasonable might get thrown out the window if it hasn't been already. All it would take is for Espn to tell the MWC that TCU would help their next tv contract combined with some consultant telling them they have a chance for BCS if they make the right moves. TCU would do it, not because they wouldnt understand the travel pitfalls, but because they would have no choice but to pursue the best chance for playoff inclusion.

There are three problems with adding to the MWC. First, creating divisions. Any geographic division usurps historic rivalries. That's why these inbreds split off from the WAC. Second, I agree with Stallion, travel is a killer. Third, if the MWC wants to add two/four teams, it has to decide which direction its wants to go, west or east. It already has a west coast team in SDS, and will likely head in that direction. My guess is that they at first add two teams, Nevada (UNLV wants them), Fresno (or SJS problem=non-qualifiers), then later Hawaii (the Mormons are trying to make Hawaii Utah west and H Bowl), and Boise State (H Bowl and Ranking) if they need 12 for a conference championship. If they go east, then they'd add UTEP, TCU, UH, and ???? But I think they'd at most add two to start and it makes more geographical sense to go west and stay in their region. Thus, Nevada and Fresno (or SJS).

Man I see a real possibility of a deadlock on voting in the MWC. UNLV insisting on Nevada, BYU insisting on Hawaii, SDSU insisting on Fresno or maybe Nevada, the front range schools insisting on remaining together and several Presidents insisting that TCU NOT be invited due to lack of proximity and common interests. Remember the selfish interests of these schools is what broke up the WAC 16. I bet they end up compromising just to get the votes to add anyone just like the ACC.

ES and Stallion, you make very logical arguments about travel cost and politics. Still, I dont think logic will necessarily dictate how things move. The ONLY reason the MWC expands is to position themselves for BCS. There is no other reason and Craig Thompson has said so. With BCS as the premise, I start to ask myself, who helps them more to that end, TCU or Nevada? Unlike the ACC situation, which was largely a defensive move to keep Florida St. happy, MWC expansion will be an offensive play. I don't see as much room for compromise, if the networks and the BCS powers put more stock in TCU, then thats the way they will move. The question is how just how much is TCU's stock worth?