I don't really want to move, so I'd happily take the MAC. Relatively modest political pressure compared to the others, stable membership, reasonable expectations, nice salary...and membership would probably let me stay in Chicago. It's not like Cleveland is a long flight, though.

(06-04-2022 05:41 AM)schmolik Wrote:  If the job comes with free trips to Hawaii, MWC! You also get San Diego. As long as I get to skip Boise and Wyoming.

Better yet, can I just be the Big West commissioner instead?

Boise and Laramie are actually really scenic cities. (I love my alma mater of Illinois, but it might have the least natural scenery of any school anywhere.) It’s a good point about places to visit, though: Hawaii, San Diego, Las Vegas, the Bay Area, the Lake Tahoe region, Fort Collins, Albuquerque, Boise, etc. The MWC definitely has the best lineup out of the G5 of places that I’d actually like to visit. Come to think of it, the Pac-12 is the same way at the P5 level - the West has a lot of really nice locations.

If I get to keep the current Commissioner salary? AAC no question.

(06-03-2022 10:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I’d pick the MWC: Why? For political influence I’d work on:
Wyoming: 2 US Senators; no P5 representation
New Mexico: 2 US senators: no P5 representation
Nevada: same
Hawaii: same
Idaho: same
Colorado:2 US Senators and only CU has P5 representation;AF &CSU do not.

That’s a potential 12 US Senators who could fight and demand the MWC deserves power conference representation. I see no other G5 with that kind of political power, and let’s be honest, college sports is political.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 10:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I’d pick the MWC: Why? For political influence I’d work on:
Wyoming: 2 US Senators; no P5 representation
New Mexico: 2 US senators: no P5 representation
Nevada: same
Hawaii: same
Idaho: same
Colorado:2 US Senators and only CU has P5 representation;AF &CSU do not.

That’s a potential 12 US Senators who could fight and demand the MWC deserves power conference representation. I see no other G5 with that kind of political power, and let’s be honest, college sports is political.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

The pressure point isn't the sportswriters adn fans, it's the idea that 12 Senators would make noise and jump up and down and get the MWC included as a peer of the Big 12 and Big 10 in the next College Football Playoff or whatever.

It's highly overrrated.

(06-03-2022 11:40 PM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  No to CUSA and AAC. Judy seemingly has axes swinging for her head from all directions.

Seven years on the job and still going strong.

The Jeep Lady continues to outfox her critics

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

Attn: Mikey Aresco

(06-04-2022 08:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 10:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I’d pick the MWC: Why? For political influence I’d work on:
Wyoming: 2 US Senators; no P5 representation
New Mexico: 2 US senators: no P5 representation
Nevada: same
Hawaii: same
Idaho: same
Colorado:2 US Senators and only CU has P5 representation;AF &CSU do not.

That’s a potential 12 US Senators who could fight and demand the MWC deserves power conference representation. I see no other G5 with that kind of political power, and let’s be honest, college sports is political.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

The pressure point isn't the sportswriters adn fans, it's the idea that 12 Senators would make noise and jump up and down and get the MWC included as a peer of the Big 12 and Big 10 in the next College Football Playoff or whatever.

It's highly overrrated.

And how would they do that, if not by legislation? They could, of course, be joined by their combined 19 congressmen (out of 435) since both Houses of Congress are required to pass legislation.

The point is, this quixotic effort isn't what you want your commissioner to be wasting his time on. We are being trolled.

(06-04-2022 09:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 10:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I’d pick the MWC: Why? For political influence I’d work on:
Wyoming: 2 US Senators; no P5 representation
New Mexico: 2 US senators: no P5 representation
Nevada: same
Hawaii: same
Idaho: same
Colorado:2 US Senators and only CU has P5 representation;AF &CSU do not.

That’s a potential 12 US Senators who could fight and demand the MWC deserves power conference representation. I see no other G5 with that kind of political power, and let’s be honest, college sports is political.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

The pressure point isn't the sportswriters adn fans, it's the idea that 12 Senators would make noise and jump up and down and get the MWC included as a peer of the Big 12 and Big 10 in the next College Football Playoff or whatever.

It's highly overrrated.

And how would they do that, if not by legislation? They could, of course, be joined by their combined 19 congressmen (out of 435) since both Houses of Congress are required to pass legislation.

The point is, this quixotic effort isn't what you want your commissioner to be wasting his time on. We are being trolled.

I generally agree with you. But it's not a hundred percent trolling. Back in the day, when Utah got screwed, Orrin Hatch held some hearings jumped up and down and the old BCS made some tweaks to guarantee access to BCS Busters under various conditions.

(06-04-2022 08:42 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

Attn: Mikey Aresco

If Mikey was their commish you know he’d try it haha! Don’t know what it’s worth but I’ve seen Senators fight hard for their state schools. Hatch in Utah, McConnell on behalf of Louisville, Blumenthall for UConn. I could list others and I could also say not all were successful but it brings attention. MWC could add Montana and make it 14 Senators.
CUSA would be my second choice. Bare cupboard; a lot to explore. Plus Judy has set the bar very low.

(06-04-2022 09:13 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 09:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 10:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I’d pick the MWC: Why? For political influence I’d work on:
Wyoming: 2 US Senators; no P5 representation
New Mexico: 2 US senators: no P5 representation
Nevada: same
Hawaii: same
Idaho: same
Colorado:2 US Senators and only CU has P5 representation;AF &CSU do not.

That’s a potential 12 US Senators who could fight and demand the MWC deserves power conference representation. I see no other G5 with that kind of political power, and let’s be honest, college sports is political.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

The pressure point isn't the sportswriters adn fans, it's the idea that 12 Senators would make noise and jump up and down and get the MWC included as a peer of the Big 12 and Big 10 in the next College Football Playoff or whatever.

It's highly overrrated.

And how would they do that, if not by legislation? They could, of course, be joined by their combined 19 congressmen (out of 435) since both Houses of Congress are required to pass legislation.

The point is, this quixotic effort isn't what you want your commissioner to be wasting his time on. We are being trolled.

I generally agree with you. But it's not a hundred percent trolling. Back in the day, when Utah got screwed, Orrin Hatch held some hearings jumped up and down and the old BCS made some tweaks to guarantee access to BCS Busters under various conditions.

Orrin Hatch had some stature and credibility. That's not the case with these senators, most of whom nobody here could name without looking them up or living in one of those states.

(06-04-2022 08:27 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 11:40 PM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  No to CUSA and AAC. Judy seemingly has axes swinging for her head from all directions.

Seven years on the job and still going strong.

The Jeep Lady continues to outfox her critics

She's got matrix moves.

(06-04-2022 09:38 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 09:13 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 09:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-04-2022 08:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that 12 senators from small population states are going to require that sportswriters and fans start calling the MWC a power conference. What's the penalty for not complying?

The pressure point isn't the sportswriters adn fans, it's the idea that 12 Senators would make noise and jump up and down and get the MWC included as a peer of the Big 12 and Big 10 in the next College Football Playoff or whatever.

It's highly overrrated.

And how would they do that, if not by legislation? They could, of course, be joined by their combined 19 congressmen (out of 435) since both Houses of Congress are required to pass legislation.

The point is, this quixotic effort isn't what you want your commissioner to be wasting his time on. We are being trolled.

I generally agree with you. But it's not a hundred percent trolling. Back in the day, when Utah got screwed, Orrin Hatch held some hearings jumped up and down and the old BCS made some tweaks to guarantee access to BCS Busters under various conditions.

Orrin Hatch had some stature and credibility. That's not the case with these senators, most of whom nobody here could name without looking them up or living in one of those states.

Giants of the Senate.

If location makes any difference:

AAC - Irving, TX
CUSA - Dallas, TX
MAC - Cleveland, OH
SBC - New Orleans, LA
MWC - Colorado Springs, CO

(06-04-2022 04:29 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  If location makes any difference:

AAC - Irving, TX
CUSA - Dallas, TX
MAC - Cleveland, OH
SBC - New Orleans, LA
MWC - Colorado Springs, CO

MWC based on that followed by The Belch.

(06-03-2022 10:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  MAC and I would stop the prohibition on basketball only members.

Ahhh, you would be open to teams like UIC, Cleveland State, etc. Not bad!!

It really comes down to what kind of work that you would want to do.

If you want to wade into a mess and think you might be able to build something, then cusa, or the new cusa, the aac.

If you want to get your hands into realignment dominoes, then either of those 2, plus the sunbelt.

if you're looking for more "stability", then we move from the sunbelt, towards the MWC, and get to the rather stable MAC.

But it all depends on what you're looking for.

I deleted a post. I thought is about an AD at a G5 school not a commissioner. I didn’t want to detract from the point of the thread. My apologies.

[qute='RutgersMike' pid='18262690' dateline='1654407932']
I deleted a post. I thought is about an AD at a G5 school not a commissioner. I didn’t want to detract from the point of the thread. My apologies.
[/quote]

Actually, I would want to be the SunBelt commissioner. I would be in contact with Karl Benson, and I would be wanting to get all tv exposure I could possibly get. There's a lot rivalries, and a lot of stability as well, for now.

The correct answer is Mountain West.

The MAC, with 6 teams in Ohio who will never be on par with Ohio State? Can't win.
The Sun Belt, with the ability to capitalize on how much everyone loves football but will always be second or third fiddle in every state to P5? Can't win.
The AAC has zero identity, and added schools because markets, but markets they can't compete in because despite population centers of cities NOW, colleges which were put out in the middle of no where 100 years ago are institutions; and AAC schools are afterthoughts. Can't win.
C-USA, which got raided by the Sun Belt after decades of looking down their noses at them... come on. They can't win.

The only conference which CAN carve out a niche is the Mountain West. National TV demos by time zone work against them, but Boise State, San Diego State, Nevada, UNLV, New Mexico, Fresno State, Wyoming can dominate their markets. Hawai'i already does. San Jose State, Colorado State and Air Force will be 2nd/3rd in their region, but their region is big. Utah State is in a small region, but has consistently been really good performance-wise despite of that.

The Mountain West can make themselves a player with a strategic plan. The MAC, Sun Belt, AAC and C-USA can't.