OT: MWC Expansion
Having read Brian's article at the Sporting Blog, I was interested to contemplate how and if the Mountain West would expand. Let's assume for the moment- a big assumption, I know- that the conference would decide to expand.
Obviously, Boise State is an attractive option, but I've always heard that the BSU academic scene is somewhat lacking comparatively speaking to the MWC's schools. Does anyone know if this is the case? I don't want to be the snobby Michigan fan- particularly since I'm the alum of a school in another state- but I don't think the MWC's school are exactly New Ivy, yet I've often heard that this rumor about Boise would be a hindrance.
Second, I know football is the elephant in the room, 400 pound gorilla, BMOC, tattooed lady, whatever analogy works for you, but it isn't the only sport. Does it seem that the other sports-Basketball, olympic sports, women's sports, etc.- would be markedly different at Boise vs the MWC?
Third, do you think the conference would be wise to sit at ten teams and play round robin, or should they go all out and add three to create the fairy tale land of two divisions and a championship game where all our hopes and dreams come true and the money pours in (just ask the ACC, right guys?) I think there would be benefit in the 12 team format in that all of the teams would not have to play each other and you preserve teams at least until the end of the year. Furthermore, I think if the MWC did have twelve teams, it would gain automatic status for BCS games regardless, so the championship game wouldn't matter as far as kicking a team out of a BCS bowl game.
The teams that I think make the most sense for inclusion/expansion are: Boise State (duh), Houston, and Fresno State.
Fresno State adds a team in California to go with San Diego State, and opens up a media market in the Silicon Valley (insert Pamela Anderson joke here). Also creates more exposure for recruiting in California.
Houston gives a more logical reason for TCU to be in the conference, and creates the same opportunities in Texas that Fresno State would create in California.
The last question that I have is this: If anyone is familiar with the Houston/Dallas region, do you think Houston or SMU is better positioned for long-term success? If it's SMU, would they be a better fit?
As a NCAAF fan, I'd really enjoy watching the top schools in that conference battling it out, and a championship game at the end of the year could send a team to a BCS game as well.
Sorry if this is too WAY off topic for somepeople, but Brian did write about this over at The Sporting News, and a re-alignment of the westerly conferences could shakeup the BCS as it currently stands.
October 1st, 2009 at 2:53 PM ^
On this question:
The last question that I have is this: If anyone is familiar with the Houston/Dallas region, do you think Houston or SMU is better positioned for long-term success? If it's SMU, would they be a better fit?I think the answer is UH. June Jones may end up being semi-successful at SMU but I doubt it. Also, SMU has academic restrictions that UH does not have to deal with. Also, neither school has really shown sustained success over the last 20 years, but UH has at least had glimpses, whereas SMU has never rebounded from the death penalty. If UH can keep Sumlin, that's a real big if, then they are going to be pretty dangerous in the coming years. I honestly believe that. As far as the expansion of the MWC to include WAC teams, I find it amusing since the MWC broke away from the WAC ten years back of so. While it makes sense, it's just kind of an odd situation. Everything would be full circle.
October 1st, 2009 at 2:58 PM ^
of schools like wyoming and new mexico would clearly be too much to handle for boise
October 1st, 2009 at 5:04 PM ^
If this is sarcasm, you can kiss my ass.
October 1st, 2009 at 3:04 PM ^
Houston does not have a great track record in football. They are 32-20 from 2005-08 with one Conference USA championship and no marquee wins (their best wins all came last year, against incorrectly ranked Tulsa and East Carolina). They are 1-3 in bowls during that time, with a win over Air Force. Meanwhile, their basketball team hasn't made it to the NCAA tournament in a long time and hasn't reached the NIT since the 2005-06 season (although they have made it to the CBI twice in a row, with exits in the "final four" and first round). Finally, they are rather mediocre academically (highlights include the law school, architecture school, and evening MBA program).
October 1st, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^
Would definitely be a good candidate for inclusion in the MWC, though it should be noted that Fresno is not really close to the Silicon Valley at all. It's a good 3+ hour drive.
That said, Fresno is known as the Central Valley's team and they really do support the Bulldogs out there. It would break up the longstanding conference rivalry that Fresno has had with San Jose State though. I'm not sure how much they want to do that.
October 1st, 2009 at 4:09 PM ^
is a result of over-expansion of the WAC. The original members of the WAC all left to create the MWC because the 16 team WAC was unmanageable as a conference.
Don't expect the MWC to be looking at expansion anythime soon.
October 1st, 2009 at 4:20 PM ^
I thought the same thing at first, but I don't think this will necessarily be the case if the MWC can just cherry pick the three best fitting teams and then refuse admittance to anyone else. The 16(!) team WAC was just a mess, but the MWC should be just fine with 12 teams and a championship game. They just need to avoid going the way of the MAC and stick with 12 teams and not randomly add teams to end up with 13 members in unbalanced divisions or anything like that, because then they would eventually just end up like the old WAC mess.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:23 PM ^
joined the MWC in the last 3-4 years. They might not want to expand to a big conference ala the huge WAC, but if they could add Boise then that would make them a very attractive non-BCS conference in football - Utah, BYU, TCU and Boise - 4 programs that are consistently around the best of the non-BCS programs.
October 1st, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
"Sorry if this is too WAY off topic for somepeople, but Brian did write about this over at The Sporting News"
This isn't off topic at all. It's discussion of college football.
We gotta cut down on all of the threads being labeled OT. Not to come down on you, just hoping people will start to use it less.
Per your other questions:
I think BSU and even Idaho would be good. I think even one team is hard to add, but if you could get 3, and then have a championship game it would make it easier to take seriously as a BCS conference bc you get more chances to see the teams and it builds the eventual winner's resume.
I also think that these teams as a whole are getting better, and with the regression of other BCS teams and conferences, they can win more recruiting battles.
October 1st, 2009 at 6:04 PM ^
Thanks, that's cool. I was REALLY unsure if anybody here cared about the Mountain West, but I'm glad you all do.
I'm not sure Idaho has the track record in any major sport to contribute much to the MWC; their attendance has been sketchy as well. Agreed about the championship game. If June Jones is successful in Dallas, it'd be fun to watch a SMU- Utah championship game on the last weekend of the regular season for a BCS berth.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:06 PM ^
I don't think Houston leaves CUSA for their other sports. They'd be downgraded in both basketballs and baseball, three of their better sports. They also have Rice in their own conference right now, and that is their true rival. They were just placed in the same conference a few years ago, I don't see them breaking up that nice alignment in the immediate future.
UH also definitely fits the mold of the C-USA, a predominately urban campus conference with high numbers of local, commuter students.
SMU makes some sense as a higher level academic institution. Houston was just approved to be included in the State of Texas "Move to Tier One" program (the state is trying to move up 2-3 of its Universities, including Tech and UH to tier one academic standards), but that is still a few years in the making. SMU is at least showing signs of life now, which puts them on par with some of the teams at the bottom of the MWC. Louisiana Tech also could be a geographic fit for TCU, but I think SMU has more to offer.
I still think Fresno is the best pick. They have a more balanced Olympic sport spread than Boise. Their academics are supposedly better. As pointed out above, that also adds a second team in California, where most of the recruiting happens for those teams.
As far as taking on three teams though, I don't see that happening. The MWC split from the WAC because of over expansion. There were like 16 teams in a super conference. I would imagine they'd want to avoid that becoming another possibility.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:33 PM ^
Of course there's also the fact that SMU just left the WAC, in part because they didn't like the travel. So, I am not sure that they would be willing to jump back into that mess.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:49 PM ^
At least they'd avoid the highly expensive Hawai'i trip.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:46 PM ^
to move to a bigger conference. I know a few sport reporter types down here have said they'd like to upgrade their facilities to try to make a jump somewhere.
The baseball argument is very valid though and I agree with you, I'd like to see Rice move with them into some bigger conference of up and coming teams like Utah, Boise, etc.
October 1st, 2009 at 6:31 PM ^
No doubt on wanting them to make the jump. The almost could have when the SWC ended. If they'd been able to keep up their level of success after Ware left, they could have been a candidate for the Big12. Not a very good one, but at least an outside shot at being included. They've slowly built the program up over the last two coaches, and if they can retain a guy for long enough, they could see some success.
I just don't see another opportunity like the MWC has to offer (a non-BCS conference with a case to be included in the BCS) coming up any time soon. It's not like they're going to join the Big12 or SEC any time soon. Baylor may be bad at football, but on the whole, they're not bad enough to drop from the Big12 by any means.
And yes, baseball is kind of my thing, so that becomes important. I can't see Rice wanting to move out of C-USA for anything short of a invitation to a BCS level school. The old Super-WAC was generally horrible for baseball (outside of Fresno's Cinderella and TCU). C-USA is all but a power conferences these days with Rice, Houston, Tulane, Southern Miss, and East Carolina. And at Rice, baseball, for the most part, has come well before football, especially football minus Dillard.
October 1st, 2009 at 7:10 PM ^
You catch any Rice games? I moved down here for grad school and have been trying to go to as many as I can. I think college baseball is pretty underrated and has the best rules regarding whether high school kids can go pro or attend school.
October 1st, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^
Yeah, I'm from Houston. Back to living here again. I make it to a couple Rice and UH games each season, plus the college classic. I once worked the field crew at Rice during the NCAA tournament, even got to talk mess with Lance Berkman when he was still an Owl. Should have got his autograph then.
You'll probably notice the baseball coverage around here pick up in February. When I was at VarsityBlue, I covered the M baseball team fairly thoroughly.
I think the high school vs college vs pros rules really waters down a lot of the college talent. I kind of like the football system better myself, but that just doesn't fit baseball's pre-existing minor league system.
October 2nd, 2009 at 6:27 PM ^
I should have stated what I meant a little better. Football is the best, but they can get away with it because almost no 18 year-old can compete in the NFL. In baseball and basketball it's a little different. I hope that basketball can do the same thing as baseball and hockey. If you're an outstanding athlete, you can go pro, but if you come to college, you've got to stay here for three years.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:10 PM ^
They should make a new BCS conference with elite members of the MWC and WAC and maybe 2 from the Big 12. Plus make the Cotton Bowl a BCS bowl. Get all the former members of the SWC currently in non-BCS leagues, except for Rice, plus maybe Boise St.
BYU
Utah
Utah St (for some reason I feel like big state schools can build big programs)
Houston
TCU
SMU
Boise St.
Memphis?
Texas Tech? Baylor? Kick out 2 Big 12 teams so they have to play a round-robin and avoid controversies like last year's tie breaker.
Obviously this would probably never happen, and I'm ignoring important things like TV contracts, athletic budgets, and red tape, but hey it's a start.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:46 PM ^
Air Force
Boise St
BYU
Utah
Fresno State
SMU
Houston
Rice
Nevada (decent in football and basketball)
Tulsa
TCU
Utah St (might suck at football but very solid at hoops)
October 1st, 2009 at 5:46 PM ^
Boise and Whoever else they sign up cuz it's a conference that should be BCS with the rest of them. I also like anything that prolongs the college season, so more conferences with more conference championship games make me heppy.
On a side not: Why apologize for a good topic? It's sports related, it's college footabll related, and hell, it sure beats the usual Scout-Dork shit like what city a guy will be in and do they have TV's, or the "Sparties is douchebagz" shit as well.
But one thing IS annoying: the sniveling, "But Brian wrote about it..." just write your topic and don't try to justify it with that type of bitch move. I mean, if Brian jumped off the Eiffel Tower...
October 1st, 2009 at 6:11 PM ^
Incidentally, Utah and Colorado State are ranked 63 and 64, respectively according to US News.
Maybe the MWC could add Colorado School of the Mines, which is 34th.
October 1st, 2009 at 6:44 PM ^
Don't ask me how I know this, but Colorado School of the Mines has the worst all-time winning percentage in D2 men's basketball.
P.S.: I sensed the sarcasm.
October 1st, 2009 at 6:53 PM ^
Here in the middle of the MWC, I can say that most people don't think MWC needs to change a thing. They've got 2-3 national quality teams, a couple of respectable middle-of-the-packers (see: Air Force playing tough at Minnesota), and some scrubs. In other words, it's already a BCS-worthy conference. Look at their bowl record as a conference in this decade: 21-15.
Boise's got an incentive to join the MWC, not the other way around.
Also, anyone who's suggesting Utah State join the MWC is huffing something I want in on. Only Utah needs to play them in their rivalry game. No one else cares about them.
October 1st, 2009 at 7:10 PM ^
Fresno is a LONG way, both geographically and culturally, from the Silicon Valley. Believe me. The Silicon Valley's team is Stanford.
October 1st, 2009 at 8:59 PM ^
I'm an outsider, and I really don't know, even though I claim to like geography.
But don't the Bulldogs have a big green "V" on their helmets to represent the Valley? or is that a different valley.
October 2nd, 2009 at 6:48 PM ^
The "V" is for the San Joaquin Valley (part of the larger Central Valley), in which Fresno is located.
If you look on a map, Fresno is in Central California, far away from Silicon Valley (which is on the southern edge of the Bay Area).
October 1st, 2009 at 9:10 PM ^
"Fresno State adds a team in California to go with San Diego State, and opens up a media market in the Silicon Valley "
I think you mean the Central Valley. Silicon Valley is San Jose/Palo Alto in the South Bay, which is occupied by Stanford when they are watching college football at all.