PonyFans.com

There is no good choice, but the MWC would be far superior to the nBE. Especially with Cincinnati and uConn gone. Maybe C-USA would take us back.

What if you threw in:

BE TV Contract can likely still beat MWC
SMU and UH don't have to decide right now
There could be 6 teams in BE with 11 wins and/or BCS Bowls in recent years
We might still be playing BE Basketball schedule for 1-2 years
BE Revenue likely better than MWC
BE Bowls likely better than MWC
Eastern exposure is undoubtedly better than Western exposure
Your check for 5 Million to go to a conference that really has less exposure and less revenue, worse bowls-If not you, who in the hell is ging to write that check when we don't need to make that decision right now anyway? Also you or somebody will be on the hook for MWC exit fee if ACC starts expanding? SMU and Houston are the only real gateways to a bigger Texas market for either MWC or BE this year, next year or forseeable future. I think we should stand pat for now

All good points but from 2014 on, the MWC is far stronger and has far better upside potential than the nBE. I think we should be thinking much farther down the road than 2013.

yeah I think alot of us will concede that might happen-we just don't think that decision needs to be made right now

Stay with the nBE and we should have bigger plans for 2014 and moving forward.

SMUstang wrote:All good points but from 2014 on, the MWC is far stronger and has far better upside potential than the nBE. I think we should be thinking much farther down the road than 2013.

The strength of NBE vs. MWC is debateable based on its depth of quality teams. Stallion is correct, we can nothing by running to weaker media value, in pursuit of a questionable outcome or prospect.

Our choice is not a conference (since we are committed now), but whether we can consistently win 10+ games and be attractive to a Power Conference. We need to play our hand with the longer view in mind. We don't have to make any decision now.

The only problem is we only have a schedule with the BE for 2013. We need to move fast if we are going to change that. I would hate to join the BE only to have it fall completely apart. We are no more committed than Boise was.

Keith Whitmire ‏@Keith_Whitmire

Data supports SMU sticking with Big East: http://www.mwcconnection.com/2012/12/31 ... he-numbers …

SMU 86 wrote:Keith Whitmire ‏@Keith_Whitmire

Data supports SMU sticking with Big East: http://www.mwcconnection.com/2012/12/31 ... he-numbers …

Good find and all good points to be made.

Using data from Football Outsider we look at what league has been better since 2008.


Ever since the Big East lost Rutgers and Louisville, and then added East Carolina and Tulane to shore up their league, there have been many of arguments about what is the better league. There has already been a post on this site about what league has the better television market, and the Big East has the edge on that font. Market size is key for securing a television rights deal.

Now after a few weeks of gathering data, as well as being lazy, we have number from Football Outsiders combined F/+ rankings from 2008 to pre bowl 2012 season. That is five years and plenty of data to consider and make a sound judgement for which league has the better teams. There is also a breakdown of offensive, defensive and special team rankings as well.

For the sake of argument, I have Boise State and San Diego State in the Mountain West, plus I started using BYU because they have been discussed about joining either the Mountain West or Big East. Below is a look at the past five years of F/+ rankings, and make sure to check the tabs at the bottom to cycle through the years:

After looking at the average numbers, first it is no shock that Boise State is the top team, and it is not even close. They are the only top 25 team of the bunch. One other shocker is that New Mexico was not the worst team over the past five years, and also that Memphis was slightly better ranked than Wyoming.

Overall, it is the Big East which has the better league in regards to competition, with all but two schools who are ranked in the top 100; while the Mountain West has four.

Mountain West Big East Independent
Boise State - 8.4 Cincinnati - 29.2 BYU - 35.8

Nevada - 58
Connecticut - 47.0
Air Force - 64.8 South Florida - 47.8
Fresno State - 68
Houston - 53.2
San Diego State - 74 Central Florida - 54.4
Utah State - 78.2 Navy - 61
Hawaii - 85.4 Temple - 61.4
San Jose State - 87.8 East Carolina - 69.6
Colorado State - 102.2 SMU - 77
Wyoming - 104.8 Memphis - 103.6
UNLV - 105.2 Tulane - 112.4
New Mexico - 109.4

So there you all have it, the Big East will still be a better league than the Mountain West, even if Boise State and San Diego State stay in the Mountain West. Even if the Mountain West to somehow coax BYU to return, the Big East would still be better

MWC will be there whenever UH and SMU want to decide whether to go or not. We aren't getting the Tulsa treatment; we're hot dates among the rejects. Just chill, win, build, and fill. Also remember that the MWC just cut a sweetheart deal to Boise to rope them in, so if and/or when UH and SMU join, you're in a league that's already favoring a single school...seems sorta familiar.

I'm usually at ends with stallion but what he stated is correct. There is no way the MWC is better than the BE. Please remember that we literally beat the living day lights out of their conference co champion. This team if I remember correctly was competitive with Boise state. So yeah we might as well stick with a conference of possibilities than one that will pander to "big blue." I hope big east tries to steal the liberty bowl from cusa. We could use our 3rd place team to play an sec team. I think big east needs to add rice and Tulsa to bring in education rating and a team that has been competitive with big boys. Best part of the situation we are dealt with is we can just wait.

SMU_Alumni11 wrote:I'm usually at ends with stallion but what he stated is correct. There is no way the MWC is better than the BE. Please remember that we literally beat the living day lights out of their conference co champion. This team if I remember correctly was competitive with Boise state. So yeah we might as well stick with a conference of possibilities than one that will pander to "big blue." I hope big east tries to steal the liberty bowl from cusa. We could use our 3rd place team to play an sec team. I think big east needs to add rice and Tulsa to bring in education rating and a team that has been competitive with big boys. Best part of the situation we are dealt with is we can just wait.

I agree and feel that re-embracing the East, at this time, is the best course for SMU and Houston. Your comment about "big blue" could be flipped into a pander to another "big blue", BYU. If BE can be flexible, then the inclusion of BYU would firmly establish the eastern group as absolutely, the best non-Power Conference. BTW, BYU will not rejoin MWC, which lost Utah, their natural rival. (To add to the strategy, invite Gonzaga for BB.) Too bad, Air Force won't consider joining along with the Cougars.

If SMU and UH leave the BE, does it accelerate the BE demise by prompting Maryland and others to bolt and forfeiting exit fees that would otherwise be due? There is value in that.

SMU Football Blog wrote:If SMU and UH leave the BE, does it accelerate the BE demise by prompting Maryland and others to bolt and forfeiting exit fees that would otherwise be due? There is value in that.

Maryland is in the ACC and going to the Big Ten. How would SMU/Houston impact Maryland in any way? I realize Maryland and the Big Ten can have a big impact on ACC which impacts the Big East which impacts SMU, but not the other way around.

mustangxc wrote:

SMU Football Blog wrote:If SMU and UH leave the BE, does it accelerate the BE demise by prompting Maryland and others to bolt and forfeiting exit fees that would otherwise be due? There is value in that.

Maryland is in the ACC and going to the Big Ten. How would SMU/Houston impact Maryland in any way? I realize Maryland and the Big Ten can have a big impact on ACC which impacts the Big East which impacts SMU, but not the other way around.

I assume he meant Rutgers, not Maryland.