Ponies tell MWC to shove it

[ponyboy]

Good points, though I'm not sure who you're arguing with, NC.

[Cougar King]

Apparently, here's what's going on between us, BYU and the MWC.



* At the Big East AD meeting Jan. 11 in Dallas, the Big East will give UH and SDSU an ultimatum to commit to the Big East or the MWC;

* SMU already confirmed its commitment to the Big East no matter what UH does. SMU told UH it will not reconsider;

* BYU and UH want a walk away with no exit fee and no notice requirement if they ever leave the MWC to one of the Power 5 conferences;

* UH told the MWC it needs to see a signed agreement with BYU on essential terms prior to Jan. 11. UH will join the MWC if the conference can reach an agreement on essential terms with BYU by the Jan. 11 deadline;

* BYU told UH that BYU will do whatever ESPN tells it to do;

* The BYU problem appears to be that CBS will obtain rights to nationally televise BYU's MWC away games. ESPN wants a limit on the number of away games that CBS can broadcast. ESPN has concerned another 2-3 nationally-televised BYU games could saturate the market for BYU games and diminish the value of ESPN's exclusive deal with BYU;

* Both BYU and UH also question the MWC's ability to pay the $500,000 national TV bonuses for Saturday games unless CBS Sports/CBS will agree to renegotiate its contract. The MWC has not been forthcoming on the source of revenue to pay these bonuses, which would be $1 million per BYU MWC away game nationally broadcast on a Saturday;

* BYU also is demanding the MWC pay to buy out any of its out-of-conference games currently on the schedule that BYU would need to drop for scheduling purposes in the MWC. BYU also insists it retain total control over out-of-conference games currently on its schedule that it keeps (Notre Dame, Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska, etc.);

* BYU is unwilling to agree to use NCAA credits to pay football "bonuses" for nationally television games to other members; and

* UH's has told the MWC it wants terms similar to SDSU at minimum, but UH wants some flexibility to negotiate some rights to it's own home games similar to Boise State.

[ponyinNC]

Arguing with myself, ponyboy.

CK - That is a long list of "ifs" to be hammered out in 4 days.

BYU is not joining a conference, and the sooner the nBE and MWC realize this, the better off they will be.

[WE ARE BACK]

Apparently, here's what's going on between us, BYU and the MWC.



* At the Big East AD meeting Jan. 11 in Dallas, the Big East will give UH and SDSU an ultimatum to commit to the Big East or the MWC;

* SMU already confirmed its commitment to the Big East no matter what UH does. SMU told UH it will not reconsider;

* BYU and UH want a walk away with no exit fee and no notice requirement if they ever leave the MWC to one of the Power 5 conferences;

* UH told the MWC it needs to see a signed agreement with BYU on essential terms prior to Jan. 11. UH will join the MWC if the conference can reach an agreement on essential terms with BYU by the Jan. 11 deadline;

* BYU told UH that BYU will do whatever ESPN tells it to do;

* The BYU problem appears to be that CBS will obtain rights to nationally televise BYU's MWC away games. ESPN wants a limit on the number of away games that CBS can broadcast. ESPN has concerned another 2-3 nationally-televised BYU games could saturate the market for BYU games and diminish the value of ESPN's exclusive deal with BYU;

* Both BYU and UH also question the MWC's ability to pay the $500,000 national TV bonuses for Saturday games unless CBS Sports/CBS will agree to renegotiate its contract. The MWC has not been forthcoming on the source of revenue to pay these bonuses, which would be $1 million per BYU MWC away game nationally broadcast on a Saturday;

* BYU also is demanding the MWC pay to buy out any of its out-of-conference games currently on the schedule that BYU would need to drop for scheduling purposes in the MWC. BYU also insists it retain total control over out-of-conference games currently on its schedule that it keeps (Notre Dame, Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska, etc.);

* BYU is unwilling to agree to use NCAA credits to pay football "bonuses" for nationally television games to other members; and

* UH's has told the MWC it wants terms similar to SDSU at minimum, but UH wants some flexibility to negotiate some rights to it's own home games similar to Boise State.

So now that we told MWC to "Shove it" what happens when UH, SDSU. and BYU all go to the MWC? As I pointed out earlier, SMU's leadership just backed us up into a corner and we are screwed if UH goes to MWC... Now that Boise is gone, U of H controls our destiny. If they go and we decide that MWC isn't so bad, why would they take us at that point. We gained nothing by telling them to shove it and it could be potentially very costly. Evidently we don't know the concept of leverage becuase we just gave it all away.

[Water Pony]

Despite the title of this thread, SMU has not told anyone, much less the MWC to shove it. However, I see no problem with reiterating that we made a committment to the BE. We should not be chasing the latest rumor or scenario.

In any case, playing in the CT and ET with all those TV sets remains more attractive than playing almost all of our away games for FB and BB in the Rockies or West Coast. I would love San Diego and another destination in the west, but not as our exclusive away schedule.

As long as UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, UCF and USF (as well as Navy) are in the BE, I like that better than following UH around. If Rice continues to improve and Tulsa is solid, the BE has options, even if UH gets a case of the stupids and runs to the MWC. And, BYU is never going back to their old conference, unless MWC gives them a deal even better than BSU. Not going to happen.

[JasonB]

Our value is not in our words. Our value is in our revenue numbers, potential for growth, and the TV market. If BYU doesn't go anywhere (which is highly likely), we are in the right place. And the sooner that universities start committing to the Big East, the better the TV contract will be. All we are doing is trying to create some momentum in the right direction.

And don't forget, our BBALL program may have the chance to make a big time statement next year. And that statement will be heard louder in the big east than it will in the MWC.

[Dukie]

Despite the title of this thread, SMU has not told anyone, much less the MWC to shove it. However, I see no problem with reiterating that we made a committment to the BE. We should not be chasing the latest rumor or scenario.

If the article is correct, SMU told the MWC that SMU and Houston are going elsewhere, and Houston told the MWC they'll come if conditions are met. That's a mistake by SMU.

[GiddyUp]

what a CF, let's just hope the SMU pattern of bad luck doesn't continue in this

[leopold]

BYU, BSU, and even Frickin' SDSU have shown just how desireable it is to be in the MWC.

If BYU won't even join the MWC - the schools and rivalries they grew up with - over independance, than I see absolutely no reason to join them either.

Period.

[PK]

UH should be very careful about what they are getting ready to do if they are truely looking at joining the MWC. After the SWC went down the drain, UH went straight to C-USA. They never were involved with playing in the WAC. I wouldn't trust any of those schools in MWC to hold to any commitments they make. They left us hanging out to dry when they broke away from the 16 team WAC which they helped form.

[WE ARE BACK]

Despite the title of this thread, SMU has not told anyone, much less the MWC to shove it. However, I see no problem with reiterating that we made a committment to the BE. We should not be chasing the latest rumor or scenario.

If the article is correct, SMU told the MWC that SMU and Houston are going elsewhere, and Houston told the MWC they'll come if conditions are met. That's a mistake by SMU.

It is a big mistake by SMU for no reason... There was nothing to gain by saying that. Staying silient or just stating a commitment to the BE would have been appropriate. We are basically at the mercy of UH now because when they announce they are going to the MWC, the same morons will be here saying, "we are still in a better position which is just not the case. Nobody is going to watch us play Tulane, East Carolina, Temple etc if it comes on at 12 noon or midnight. We might as well be in a conf that we win, we play in the BCS... If you win enough BCS games ie TCU, you get noticed. That's our problem, the few of us who care aren't smart enough to see the writing on the wall.

[Treadway21]

Apparently, here's what's going on between us, BYU and the MWC.



* At the Big East AD meeting Jan. 11 in Dallas, the Big East will give UH and SDSU an ultimatum to commit to the Big East or the MWC;

* SMU already confirmed its commitment to the Big East no matter what UH does. SMU told UH it will not reconsider;

* BYU and UH want a walk away with no exit fee and no notice requirement if they ever leave the MWC to one of the Power 5 conferences;

* UH told the MWC it needs to see a signed agreement with BYU on essential terms prior to Jan. 11. UH will join the MWC if the conference can reach an agreement on essential terms with BYU by the Jan. 11 deadline;

* BYU told UH that BYU will do whatever ESPN tells it to do;

* The BYU problem appears to be that CBS will obtain rights to nationally televise BYU's MWC away games. ESPN wants a limit on the number of away games that CBS can broadcast. ESPN has concerned another 2-3 nationally-televised BYU games could saturate the market for BYU games and diminish the value of ESPN's exclusive deal with BYU;

* Both BYU and UH also question the MWC's ability to pay the $500,000 national TV bonuses for Saturday games unless CBS Sports/CBS will agree to renegotiate its contract. The MWC has not been forthcoming on the source of revenue to pay these bonuses, which would be $1 million per BYU MWC away game nationally broadcast on a Saturday;

* BYU also is demanding the MWC pay to buy out any of its out-of-conference games currently on the schedule that BYU would need to drop for scheduling purposes in the MWC. BYU also insists it retain total control over out-of-conference games currently on its schedule that it keeps (Notre Dame, Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska, etc.);

* BYU is unwilling to agree to use NCAA credits to pay football "bonuses" for nationally television games to other members; and

* UH's has told the MWC it wants terms similar to SDSU at minimum, but UH wants some flexibility to negotiate some rights to it's own home games similar to Boise State.

So now that we told MWC to "Shove it" what happens when UH, SDSU. and BYU all go to the MWC? As I pointed out earlier, SMU's leadership just backed us up into a corner and we are screwed if UH goes to MWC... Now that Boise is gone, U of H controls our destiny. If they go and we decide that MWC isn't so bad, why would they take us at that point. We gained nothing by telling them to shove it and it could be potentially very costly. Evidently we don't know the concept of leverage becuase we just gave it all away.

Why would we need leverage. We are not leaving the BE. If BYU wouldn't go to the Big 12 why would it go to MWC? MWC offered Boise a crazy deal that cuts into the conference revenue. They can't repeat that offer without screwing over other members. BYU will not go MWC.

Go East young man.

[Charleston Pony]

remember this decision is not ENTIRELY about athletics, and I think the administration has made it clear they want SMU to be recognized nationally. Go east, indeed!

Bottom line is that if you are not eventually included in one of the power 4 conferences, you will never compete for a national championship or share in the megabucks. Both the MWC and Big East are fighting to survive but in the end neither group is relevant.

[WE ARE BACK]

Apparently, here's what's going on between us, BYU and the MWC.



* At the Big East AD meeting Jan. 11 in Dallas, the Big East will give UH and SDSU an ultimatum to commit to the Big East or the MWC;

* SMU already confirmed its commitment to the Big East no matter what UH does. SMU told UH it will not reconsider;

* BYU and UH want a walk away with no exit fee and no notice requirement if they ever leave the MWC to one of the Power 5 conferences;

* UH told the MWC it needs to see a signed agreement with BYU on essential terms prior to Jan. 11. UH will join the MWC if the conference can reach an agreement on essential terms with BYU by the Jan. 11 deadline;

* BYU told UH that BYU will do whatever ESPN tells it to do;

* The BYU problem appears to be that CBS will obtain rights to nationally televise BYU's MWC away games. ESPN wants a limit on the number of away games that CBS can broadcast. ESPN has concerned another 2-3 nationally-televised BYU games could saturate the market for BYU games and diminish the value of ESPN's exclusive deal with BYU;

* Both BYU and UH also question the MWC's ability to pay the $500,000 national TV bonuses for Saturday games unless CBS Sports/CBS will agree to renegotiate its contract. The MWC has not been forthcoming on the source of revenue to pay these bonuses, which would be $1 million per BYU MWC away game nationally broadcast on a Saturday;

* BYU also is demanding the MWC pay to buy out any of its out-of-conference games currently on the schedule that BYU would need to drop for scheduling purposes in the MWC. BYU also insists it retain total control over out-of-conference games currently on its schedule that it keeps (Notre Dame, Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska, etc.);

* BYU is unwilling to agree to use NCAA credits to pay football "bonuses" for nationally television games to other members; and

* UH's has told the MWC it wants terms similar to SDSU at minimum, but UH wants some flexibility to negotiate some rights to it's own home games similar to Boise State.

So now that we told MWC to "Shove it" what happens when UH, SDSU. and BYU all go to the MWC? As I pointed out earlier, SMU's leadership just backed us up into a corner and we are screwed if UH goes to MWC... Now that Boise is gone, U of H controls our destiny. If they go and we decide that MWC isn't so bad, why would they take us at that point. We gained nothing by telling them to shove it and it could be potentially very costly. Evidently we don't know the concept of leverage becuase we just gave it all away.

Why would we need leverage. We are not leaving the BE. If BYU wouldn't go to the Big 12 why would it go to MWC? MWC offered Boise a crazy deal that cuts into the conference revenue. They can't repeat that offer without screwing over other members. BYU will not go MWC.

Go East young man.

I think BYU ends up in the MWC... They did not go to the Big 12 (I'm sure they are regretting that decision) because they wanted to hold on to their Network and TV revenue. The difference is, that was before the new BCS system that is now in place. If the current system was in place then, they would have made concessions and joined the Big 12. Now, they will not have access to the BCS bowls due to the fact they wont be a conference champion. I am pretty sure the first time BYU gets ranked they will not be feeling so great knowing they have a 0% chance of going to a BCS bowl. It will kill their program so they will have to join sooner or later. MWC is desperate, if Boise State got their TV deal with the conf, they will let BYU keep their network(if possible), keep TV revenue and do whatever it takes to lure BYU in. Once they get a package that gives them at the very minimum what they have now as far as TV dollars, they will join the MWC. San Diego State is going back with their tail between their legs, so it comes down to UH and SMU. We let everyone know what we are doing, now it comes down to UH.

[SMU 86]

If all the competitive schools leave then that only makes it easier for SMU to go to a BCS bowl when then new BCS arrangement starts in 2014.