Any article on adding the Dakotas for the MWC is an absolute joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

(04-28-2018 10:05 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:57 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Would the MWC consider offering BYU a "Notre Dame" type deal, with BYU joining for all sports but football, plus a five game per year scheduling agreement and access to bowl bids?

That would seem to help both sides.

MWC already has Las Vegas Bowl for its champion.

I don't think BYU would help them do better, particularly now with that program down and out.

So 1st season since 2005 with less than 8 wins means the program is "down and out)? 2017 did suck, but 11 8+ win seasons in a row then one bad one and you're down and out. Is that your standard for all teams?

Even though scheduling 12 games a year is tough its getting better as evidenced by the 18 games over the next 5 years with PAC teams that wanted the games. The MWC teams could really use BYU to revive their fanbases and put butts in the seats. I personally prefer more games with AAC schools as they are generally above the MWC on the field and in the stands.

(04-28-2018 09:43 AM)panite Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I'd say go with NMSU & UTEP

Helps basketball and allows Boise State to move to the pacific division.

Furthers the MWC goal of western USA G5 hegemony.

Start with NMST for BB and Olympic Sports to reach a 12 team balance for all sports. Give NMST a scheduling alliance for FB for 2 to 6 games. They already play NM annually so one game is scheduled. NMST offers strong BB for the NCAA Tournament credit income side of the balance sheet. Go from there and wait out the next wave of realignment and BYU if they are the main target for future expansion for All Sports. If the MWC does not land BYU after the next realignment period they can stand pat at 12 & 12 or rethink expansion going forward from there.

I like it, I doubt New Mexico would like it because they lose locked in non-conference games in those sports. NMSU not being in the MWC makes life easier for UNM filling non-conference dates.

(04-28-2018 02:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:43 AM)panite Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I'd say go with NMSU & UTEP

Helps basketball and allows Boise State to move to the pacific division.

Furthers the MWC goal of western USA G5 hegemony.

Start with NMST for BB and Olympic Sports to reach a 12 team balance for all sports. Give NMST a scheduling alliance for FB for 2 to 6 games. They already play NM annually so one game is scheduled. NMST offers strong BB for the NCAA Tournament credit income side of the balance sheet. Go from there and wait out the next wave of realignment and BYU if they are the main target for future expansion for All Sports. If the MWC does not land BYU after the next realignment period they can stand pat at 12 & 12 or rethink expansion going forward from there.

I like it, I doubt New Mexico would like it because they lose locked in non-conference games in those sports. NMSU not being in the MWC makes life easier for UNM filling non-conference dates.

The only expansion that brings more MONEY .. into the MW is Rice .. Houston Market is GIANT .. and it is the recruiting hotbed if the Country .. Not much TV sets or recruiting going on in Las Cruces or El Paso ...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Idaho and New Mexico State would be solid additions for the MWC.

(04-28-2018 09:57 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Would the MWC consider offering BYU a "Notre Dame" type deal, with BYU joining for all sports but football, plus a five game per year scheduling agreement and access to bowl bids?

That would seem to help both sides.

In short, no BYU without football. We don't need a scheduling agreement with them and we don't need them to take a bowl spot away from the conference. They don't bring any additional bowls like Notre Dame does. In fact, BYU has a hard time getting a bowl signed up. Last year they didn't have a tie-in. This year they don't have any tie-in either but they do have the Hawaii bowl in 2019 vs the MW.
BYU doesn't offer anything of significance except football.

There are only 3 FCS programs that the MW should consider for any expansion.
#1 UC-Davis. Getting a high profile UC school in the conference would be great.
#2 Montana. The are already at a FBS level in support.
#3 Montana St. They have support at a FBS low level.

I wouldn't mind having both Montana's in the conference. Having another Land-Grant and a Flagship institution fits the MW.

(04-28-2018 02:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:43 AM)panite Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I'd say go with NMSU & UTEP

Helps basketball and allows Boise State to move to the pacific division.

Furthers the MWC goal of western USA G5 hegemony.

Start with NMST for BB and Olympic Sports to reach a 12 team balance for all sports. Give NMST a scheduling alliance for FB for 2 to 6 games. They already play NM annually so one game is scheduled. NMST offers strong BB for the NCAA Tournament credit income side of the balance sheet. Go from there and wait out the next wave of realignment and BYU if they are the main target for future expansion for All Sports. If the MWC does not land BYU after the next realignment period they can stand pat at 12 & 12 or rethink expansion going forward from there.

I like it, I doubt New Mexico would like it because they lose locked in non-conference games in those sports. NMSU not being in the MWC makes life easier for UNM filling non-conference dates.

I think what is problematic for the MWC is that by leaving NMSU out of the conference it sets a footer for a second G5 western based conference to form.

Grand Canyon
New Mexico State
Denver
UTEP
Texas St.
UTSA
North Texas
Rice
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech

Something that would be FBS with members in Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico plus a big Texas presence for recruiting.

(04-28-2018 04:45 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 02:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:43 AM)panite Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I'd say go with NMSU & UTEP

Helps basketball and allows Boise State to move to the pacific division.

Furthers the MWC goal of western USA G5 hegemony.

Start with NMST for BB and Olympic Sports to reach a 12 team balance for all sports. Give NMST a scheduling alliance for FB for 2 to 6 games. They already play NM annually so one game is scheduled. NMST offers strong BB for the NCAA Tournament credit income side of the balance sheet. Go from there and wait out the next wave of realignment and BYU if they are the main target for future expansion for All Sports. If the MWC does not land BYU after the next realignment period they can stand pat at 12 & 12 or rethink expansion going forward from there.

I like it, I doubt New Mexico would like it because they lose locked in non-conference games in those sports. NMSU not being in the MWC makes life easier for UNM filling non-conference dates.

I think what is problematic for the MWC is that by leaving NMSU out of the conference it sets a footer for a second G5 western based conference to form.

Grand Canyon
New Mexico State
Denver
UTEP
Texas St.
UTSA
North Texas
Rice
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech

Something that would be FBS with members in Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico plus a big Texas presence for recruiting.

Are you on crack? That line-up will never conference together.

As to the topic of this thread, I don't think there is any combination of programs for the MWC to lure.

(04-28-2018 03:36 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:57 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Would the MWC consider offering BYU a "Notre Dame" type deal, with BYU joining for all sports but football, plus a five game per year scheduling agreement and access to bowl bids?

That would seem to help both sides.

In short, no BYU without football. We don't need a scheduling agreement with them and we don't need them to take a bowl spot away from the conference. They don't bring any additional bowls like Notre Dame does. In fact, BYU has a hard time getting a bowl signed up. Last year they didn't have a tie-in. This year they don't have any tie-in either but they do have the Hawaii bowl in 2019 vs the MW.
BYU doesn't offer anything of significance except football.

^^^This.

(04-28-2018 10:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  Any article on adding the Dakotas for the MWC is an absolute joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Why? Because North Dakota is not on the list? This blow up your fantasy Great Northern Conference that you have been crowing about? Without those three Dakota schools? The Great Northern Conference you dream about will never happen.

(04-28-2018 06:55 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 10:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  Any article on adding the Dakotas for the MWC is an absolute joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Why? Because North Dakota is not on the list? This blow up your fantasy Great Northern Conference that you have been crowing about? Without those three Dakota schools? The Great Northern Conference you dream about will never happen.

None of those schools have stadiums more than 19k. Pretty simple for everyone except for a few. Guess the MWC will downsize then.

(04-28-2018 01:48 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 12:45 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 10:52 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The MWC has the same issue that the AAC has - there are no additions at this time that are accessible AND add value.

Nooo,,, the AAC doesn't have that problem. We're not looking for an addition but there are some East coast and West coast options.

My point exactly ^^^

But If the AAC ever expanded again here hope the American stays far far away from any West coast programs... Only program I would favor for the AAC of course would be BYU.

Take BYU and all their drama, Puleeze!!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(04-28-2018 09:57 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Would the MWC consider offering BYU a "Notre Dame" type deal, with BYU joining for all sports but football, plus a five game per year scheduling agreement and access to bowl bids?

That would seem to help both sides.

Not no, but hell no.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(04-28-2018 10:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  Any article on adding the Dakotas for the MWC is an absolute joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Agree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(04-28-2018 12:47 PM)Bluecoug Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 10:05 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 09:57 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Would the MWC consider offering BYU a "Notre Dame" type deal, with BYU joining for all sports but football, plus a five game per year scheduling agreement and access to bowl bids?

That would seem to help both sides.

MWC already has Las Vegas Bowl for its champion.

I don't think BYU would help them do better, particularly now with that program down and out.

So 1st season since 2005 with less than 8 wins means the program is "down and out)? 2017 did suck, but 11 8+ win seasons in a row then one bad one and you're down and out. Is that your standard for all teams?

Even though scheduling 12 games a year is tough its getting better as evidenced by the 18 games over the next 5 years with PAC teams that wanted the games. The MWC teams could really use BYU to revive their fanbases and put butts in the seats. I personally prefer more games with AAC schools as they are generally above the MWC on the field and in the stands.

The main fact is many MWC cannot stand some of the crap pulled by BYU over the years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(04-28-2018 03:32 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Idaho and New Mexico State would be solid additions for the MWC.

Using your logic so would the Braille School of Trucking.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(04-28-2018 06:55 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 10:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  Any article on adding the Dakotas for the MWC is an absolute joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Why? Because North Dakota is not on the list? This blow up your fantasy Great Northern Conference that you have been crowing about? Without those three Dakota schools? The Great Northern Conference you dream about will never happen.

Wow, this is funny. Pot meet Kettle.

(04-28-2018 11:24 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 06:55 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 10:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  Any article on adding the Dakotas for the MWC is an absolute joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Why? Because North Dakota is not on the list? This blow up your fantasy Great Northern Conference that you have been crowing about? Without those three Dakota schools? The Great Northern Conference you dream about will never happen.

Wow, this is funny. Pot meet Kettle.

MWC has to get into Tex [SMU, Rice, UTEP, UTSA]
protect NMST in case New Mexico moves up
LBST & Fullerton would be nice in LA, if baseball works