Unfortunately, in today's landscape, it really doesn't matter if the MWC is better than CUSA. Before the mass exodus of CUSA to the Big East/AAC, there was little difference between the existing conferences. It is only about perception. It is why the Sunbelt teams moved to CUSA. In its then state, was CUSA better than the Sunbelt? Someone thought so and the move reinforced the perception. While I don't necessarily want a bunch of late west coast/mountain games and long travel for the students, I would hope that Rice accepted an invitation, because it would help create/solidify the perception that Rice is a desirable school in realignment talks.

That said, I hate that we are at this point in college athletics. Also, I have nothing bad to say about anyone in CUSA, which, overall has been good for Rice.

(12-15-2015 11:07 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 03:35 AM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 12:25 AM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  How "REAL" is this? Last I recalled Rice and UTEP fans didn't want to go back to the MWC/WAC because of who is there and what not. Has what CUSA has become finally broken the camel's back for you guys?

I dont think it was ever real. How much do those 2 add to the mwc tv deal? Not enough to justify the exit and entrance fees.

I would think us, tech, marshall and western would like the situation we are in. dont screw up and you have the best shot at the new years 6.

Agreed

This is true. If UTEP and Rice left, it's not like CUSA would be losing two of it's top football programs. It's not as much of a loss to CUSA as it is a gain to the MWC. The MWC needs a Texas presence badly for recruiting, markets, and central time zone games.

(12-15-2015 12:25 AM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  How "REAL" is this? Last I recalled Rice and UTEP fans didn't want to go back to the MWC/WAC because of who is there and what not. Has what CUSA has become finally broken the camel's back for you guys?

Yes, CUSA 3.0 has left Rice with none of our traditional rivals and academic peers.

(12-15-2015 10:52 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Two things that I have come across that prompted the MW to discuss expansion.
Rice made overtures to the MW about membership, UTEP did not. UTEP was a tag along for fill in at #14 if they desired.

If this is true, it's great to see Rice finally being proactive. I hope we are doing the same with AAC.

(12-15-2015 11:41 AM)JCMiner Wrote:  Just being honest but C-USA is behind the AAC and MWC in football. Both conference have played and won multiple BCS/New Year's Bowl. Until we win one or at least play for one we will remain behind them.

Any team that wouldn't jump at a chance to move to one of those conferences is foolish.

While we have some good football teams we lack the name brand recognition. Two years ago an undefeated Marshall was behind a two loss Boise team in the CFP rankings. I fear that unless we have a perfect storm we might never sniff the Access Bowl. We need an undefeated team and we need the MW and AAC to really crap the bed.

While we are glad to be here instead of the Sun Belt we also have higher ambitions and will not be content until we are back with our old rivals. Be it UNM, Colorado St, SDSU or UH, SMU Memphis.

I get it for UTEP. I don't really think the football gap is very wide between the MW and CUSA, but the geography and perception difference is better for UTEP. Basketball on the other hand seems to be substantially better in the MW. At least this year. If I were UTEP, I'd support a move, if I were Rice, I'd probably stay where I was. Whatever happens, CUSA needs to greatly improve on the field and the court. It can happen, but it needs to do so in the next season or two to retain legitimacy.

C-USA needs to get its stuff together like YESTERDAY or we may start to lose teams.Most times you lose teams it is bad for perception.

I am glad to be in a conference with RICE and UTEP.I really hope they stay!

(12-15-2015 10:52 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Two things that I have come across that prompted the MW to discuss expansion.
Rice made overtures to the MW about membership, UTEP did not. UTEP was a tag along for fill in at #14 if they desired. Each school would need to bring $3.5 million in additional revenue to break even or some combo to meet the $7 million for 2 schools.

The MW is in its 3rd year under the current alignment. Things are settling in and while expansion isn't in the cards, the MW is willing to listen and discuss the fit.

I don't think there is any backhand pressure to bring BYU back. Half of the conference really doesn't want them back and the MW is more stable and the schools have the same mission and values. BYU uses athletics as a mission to spread the religion. That isn't to say that the MW is against taking religious schools (i.e. TCU) but ones that its sole purpose is to spread its faith.

All that the UTEP AD, Bob Stull, had to say on this was:

"I think all universities are always aware of potential conference movement, they always try to do what's in their best interest," athletic director Bob Stull said. "Conference USA has been good to us. Period."

(12-15-2015 11:41 AM)JCMiner Wrote:  Just being honest but C-USA is behind the AAC and MWC in football. Both conference have played and won multiple BCS/New Year's Bowl. Until we win one or at least play for one we will remain behind them.

Any team that wouldn't jump at a chance to move to one of those conferences is foolish.

While we have some good football teams we lack the name brand recognition. Two years ago an undefeated Marshall was behind a two loss Boise team in the CFP rankings. I fear that unless we have a perfect storm we might never sniff the Access Bowl. We need an undefeated team and we need the MW and AAC to really crap the bed.

While we are glad to be here instead of the Sun Belt we also have higher ambitions and will not be content until we are back with our old rivals. Be it UNM, Colorado St, SDSU or UH, SMU Memphis.

There are soo many holes in your argument. Marshall was behind BSU because of strength of schedule, mainly our lack of highly rated OC opponents and not because of the "tough" conference schedule BSU played. If MU had played the norm P5 OC like we have over the years and come out of the season 1-2 losses it would have been a dead heat to the end with BSU. Our conference mirrored theirs last year and BSU got them over the hump with the access bowl plain and simple. So comparing and undefeated MU team (till the last game) to a 2 loss BSU isn't as simple as black and white.

The G5 in general was very competitive this year vs. last year. Last year it was a 2 or 3 team race with MU, Colorado St., and BSU while the AAC has no one close to being in the conversation, and the best team in the MAC was obliterated by MU in the Boca Bowl. This year, you had Houston, Memphis, Toledo, Bowling Green, Temple, WKU, MU, USM, SDSU all racing to the finish line. Most imploded towards the end.

The best thing for everyone would be to explode all the conferences in the G5 and align based on rivals and geography. Probably the only conference this wouldn't affect would be the Sun Belt minus maybe South Alabama, GA Southern or Appy State. CUSA would lose UTEP and maybe one other texas school, gain some MAC school and maybe a sunbelt, AAC makes no changes unless raided.

Why don't we just start winning, and see where the chips fall?
Make a commitment to excellence, and see it through.
If each school could be "the best version of itself", our problems would probably evaporate.

As we say at Southern Miss, To The Top.

(12-15-2015 03:33 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Why don't we just start winning, and see where the chips fall?
Make a commitment to excellence, and see it through.
If each school could be "the best version of itself", our problems would probably evaporate.

As we say at Southern Miss, To The Top.

+2

(12-15-2015 03:42 PM)Jacque Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 03:33 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Why don't we just start winning, and see where the chips fall?
Make a commitment to excellence, and see it through.
If each school could be "the best version of itself", our problems would probably evaporate.

As we say at Southern Miss, To The Top.

+2

+3

UTEP has always been a kind of black sheep simply because of geographical separation. They'd fit well in the MWC.

(12-15-2015 03:58 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  UTEP has always been a kind of black sheep simply because of geographical separation. They'd fit well in the MWC.

The MWC historically has been academically snobby. UTEP is a pretty inclusive school admissions - wise, and that hurts their case.

(12-15-2015 03:48 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 03:42 PM)Jacque Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 03:33 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Why don't we just start winning, and see where the chips fall?
Make a commitment to excellence, and see it through.
If each school could be "the best version of itself", our problems would probably evaporate.

As we say at Southern Miss, To The Top.

+2

+3

+4 with a cherry on top.

(12-15-2015 03:58 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  UTEP has always been a kind of black sheep simply because of geographical separation. They'd fit well in the MWC.

I "could see" UTEP and UTSA going to the MWC for geographical reasons but Rice would be on the proverbial island somewhat but not exactly like La Tech was in the WAC. "If" UTEP and UTSA were to go (which I realize Rice is the one being mentioned and not UTSA) it would definitely close the seperation gap distance wise but it goes back to does CUSA fill in the gaps or stick with 12?

WEST - Rice, UNT, La Tech, USM, UAB, MT
EAST - ODU, Marshall, Charlotte, WKU, FIU, FAU

or

North - ODU, Marshall, Charlotte, WKU, MT, UAB
South - Rice, UNT, La Tech, USM, FAU, FIU

(12-15-2015 05:42 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 03:58 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  UTEP has always been a kind of black sheep simply because of geographical separation. They'd fit well in the MWC.

The MWC historically has been academically snobby. UTEP is a pretty inclusive school admissions - wise, and that hurts their case.

Then explain UNLV, Boise State and Fresno State academics. UTEP offers multiple PhD programs while the Cal State schools in Fresno, San Diego and San Jose offer anywhere from zero to very limited doctoral programs.

(12-15-2015 07:21 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 05:42 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(12-15-2015 03:58 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  UTEP has always been a kind of black sheep simply because of geographical separation. They'd fit well in the MWC.

The MWC historically has been academically snobby. UTEP is a pretty inclusive school admissions - wise, and that hurts their case.

Then explain UNLV, Boise State and Fresno State academics. UTEP offers multiple PhD programs while the Cal State schools in Fresno, San Diego and San Jose offer anywhere from zero to very limited doctoral programs.

Boise is basically a community college. I think they are the 66th ranked regional university...

offering PhDs does not necessarily make any school a top ranked university

Many of the Cal State schools are very difficult to get into and offer high quality academics

Guys, the truth is that there is very, very little difference between the G5 conferences. Some have brands that are worth more due to name recognition and market. Otherwise, there is no discernible difference.

Everyone is starting to realize this, thus the conferences are finally going to let common sense prevail and a more geographically friendly G5 (or possibly G4) will emerge. In the end, this will be better for everyone.

The above is true for MWC, CUSA, and Sunbelt. The MAC has known this bit of wisdom for eons. We all know what we are now. The AAC is the only G5 left with an elitist attitude. They will fall back to earth when the final schools with upward mobility go.

Once this happens, you will see the current G5 move to a geographically and financially feasible conferences. It will be better for all involved. It has already begun. Look at all of the new bowl agreements. They are all "SHARED" agreements among the G5. This is done to ensure the survival of everyone involved. If we are going to make it at the "highest" level, we will need to use common sense and work together to ensure our survival and the highest level of success that we can all attain.

(12-15-2015 08:43 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  offering PhDs does not necessarily make any school a top ranked university

Many of the Cal State schools are very difficult to get into and offer high quality academics

Perhaps but the Cal State schools will forever be behind the UC schools. Cal State-San Diego aka SDSU has increased its academic profile but it will never reach the status of UC-San Diego. The powers that be in Sacramento will make sure the status quo stays.