TCU considering....?

[FWMustang]

TCU Considering MWC

An extra $200,000.00 per year in travel expenses! I hope they consider that they will not always be the "#1 football team in Texas" when needing to find that extra cash.

Be sure to check for that "highest level" of competition when reviewing the Boise St. vs. BYU game last week. BSU could have hung 70 on them, too, if not for the weather.

[Nacho]

I expect TCU to go to the MWC. Will be interesting to see which team C-USA picks to replace them. La Tech would be the front-runner IMO. If UCF goes to the BE I have to go with Temple as an eastern fit.

The current MWC with TCU, Boise, Fresno and Hawaii is a pretty good conference.

[Southland]

Originally posted by FWMustang:
TCU Considering MWC

An extra $200,000.00 per year in travel expenses! I hope they consider that they will not always be the "#1 football team in Texas" when needing to find that extra cash.

Be sure to check for that "highest level" of competition when reviewing the Boise St. vs. BYU game last week. BSU could have hung 70 on them, too, if not for the weather.

The Mountain West has yet to place a team in the Final BCS Standings (WAC, MAC and CUSA have); the idea that the MWC is even in consideration for BCS inclusion is laughable.

If TCU goes, good for them; maybe it's best for football... :hmm:

...but it is going to kill the rest of their programs to play in weak recruiting markets, and in a league that gets minimal exposure outside the Rocky Mountains. :thumbdown:

[EastStang]

Who'll be TCU's travel partner, Hawaii? Talk about being an island? I do think that BYU and AFA will generate good attendance numbers. However, Wyoming, UNM, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, Hawaii and SDS have all shown that they don't travel well. But watch the structure. The gang of 5 will be in the same division (not TCU) so BYU and AFA won't show to Ft. Worth but every 4-5 years. So, the Frogs will get a steady diet of UNM, Fresno, Hawaii, UNLV and SDS. Not much different than the WAC which they left.

[Greenwich Pony]

I find it hard to believe that TCU would do something so dumb as to leave the CUSA for the MWC. Barring something totally unforeseen such as a shocking BCS bid (not likely), the MWC is going to be more expensive, away from national media attention and away from good recruiting areas. The CUSA, TCU will have far more influence, more bowls and better ratings. They may not be Nobel Laureats over there in Fort Worth, but I doubt that they're that dumb.

[Stallion]

I think that they see that Tulsa, SMU, Rice and probably Tulane too will eventually be unsuccessful in attempting to play Big time College Football under Ivy League rules. Without such a committment those school's constitute an anchor to the perception and reputation of the TCU program. The very thing that makes those schools attractive to naive posters on here like Water Pony is the exact reasons why TCU doesn't want to be associated with those schools. Not one of those programs is truly committed to competed at the highest levels of Division 1A. TCU has shown that commitment. How did I do Froggies?

<small>[ 11-03-2003, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: Stallion ]</small>

[Hoop Fan]

$200,000 per year? Thats it? Think about that. Its chumpchange. Some or all of it may be offset by a higher tv contract than what the FUTURE Cusa might get too. It looks like MWC should go to 12 like everybody else, but Eaststang hits on it when he says TCU may not be in for that. The only way it really works for TCU is if they play BYU, Air Force and Colorado State every year. No matter what anyone says, BYU is still the bellcow of the non-BCS. They pack 70,000 in for every game, quality academic reputation and are a tv draw. Much more attractive than any future CUSA opponent for TCU including Southern Miss, or Marshall. Also, if it wasn't a distinct possibility it would have been shot down by TCU before now in the media and the western media would have been told by the MWC to stop mentioning the Frogs. Theres a very good chance it will happen.

[bhop]

What I find interesting about if TCU went to the Mountain West is that it would be the first voluntary conference shift I can remember that would not be an obvious upgrade. For example, when the big SWC schools joined the Big-8, that was obviously better for them than the SWC. Same goes for the Big East schools going to the ACC, the C-USA schools going to the Big East, the WAC schools going to C-USA, etc. For that matter, TCU going from the WAC to C-USA was an obvious jump up for them.

It doesn't seem as clear when talking about a move from C-USA to the MWC though. It may well be an upgrade for the Toads. I certainly haven't worked out all the numbers. It seems like a gamble though. The MWC is not a strong football conference from top to bottom. There are several real duds in that conference that do not draw well and won't help your BCS standing to beat (ask the 2000 BYU Cougers, at least until Hawaii hung 70 on them in the last week of the season). It could turn out to be essentially a lateral move with an increase in travel costs.

Speaking of which. . .when the article estimates a $200,000 increase in travel costs for TCU, I assume they mean a $200,000 increase from travel costs in C-USA as it is currently constituted. The new format, with two divisions, would probably reduce travel costs for TCU within C-USA. Considering that, a move to the MWC might represent more than a $200,000 swing.

[Stallion]

the MWC is clearly an upgrade from the perspective of the CUSA EAST with the private schools especially Tulsa, SMU and Rice.

[KnuckleStang]

A TCU move to the MWC really amounts to spending money to CHASE money. I think they're letting their emotions and egos get in the way of rational thinking. If they think anyone who is not presently BCS is going to magically become BCS by making a (basically) lateral conference move, they're nuts.

Given the current landscape, they would be smart to stick to their roots and their rivals, and keep winning.

I say let em go. But I hope they have fun when they have a down year and nobody in FW wants to watch them play UNLV.

[Hoop Fan]

Risk and reward. You tell me where the real risk is for TCU. ? The chances of the proposed version of CUSA being stable forever more is a pipedream anyway. TCU knows that things will probably move around more in the east as the Big East wrestles with going to 12 in the future. TCU can basically rejoin CUSA or the southwest privates any time they want. CUSA is already willing to go to 13 for Navy, you can bet they would take TCU back at the drop of the hat. We would bend over backwards for them. Thats reality, not internet chest thumping. Quit worrying about TCUs money, they will do that, look at the signals that are out there.

[Southland]

Originally posted by Stallion:
the MWC is clearly an upgrade from the perspective of the CUSA EAST with the private schools especially Tulsa, SMU and Rice.

Depends largely on television positioning, which is an unknown variable at this point. I assume that is why TCU has yet to publicly acknowledge it would pull the trigger -- they are trying to gauge the television deal that the MWC will command.

Competition wise, you're correct... but those things tend to be cyclical, and can turn on a dime with a probation.

Regardless, TCU isn't going to improve over its current status, unless it moves into a BCS conference (which isn't a remote possibility). Even if they won the MWC with a perfect record, they would be playing in the Liberty Bowl.

[Stallion]

No that's where you are wrong-there are fundamental long term reasons why Rice, SMU and Tulsa suck. It ain't cyclical at least until those schools change their admission policies. Rice hasn't been to a bowl game in 43 years. SMU has had 1 winning season in 14 years and no bowls or championships, Tulsa has had I think 1 winning season in 9 years something like that.

[EastStang]

Tulsa could well end up second in the WAC this year. But the kicker is that the TV ratings for the WAC are better than for the MWC. All indications were that the MWC was going to get a TV deal more in line with the WAC deal. However, adding Fresno and Hawaii would certainly help that TV rating. Adding only TCU probably would not (sorry Frogs). So, they would be spending money to get no money. That's what's crazy about this. There is also the secret penalty. They would be foregoing the exit money which LU, MU, DPU, UC and USF would be paying CUSA. Unless of course those schools and TCU have the votes to change the CUSA charter to reduce those penalties to zero. So, they are spending an entrance fee, spending an exit fee, to get into a conference with a worse TV contract than the CUSA contract with $200,000 of increased travel costs per year. Not a good investment in my view.

[LA_Mustang]

The MWC is an upgrade from the proposed CUSA but if you play out west and your not in the PAC-10, you really dont matter. Are fans and recruits really going to care about TCU playing Utah, CSU, UNLV and BYU? They sure didnt five years ago.