• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!

BIG XII Expansion

My take is that TAMU is generating enough steam to run roughshod over the state of Texas and the Longhorn pride can't stand it. I think it is desperate return fire against the SEC. I'm probably wrong, but I think there is too much emphasis on program merits when evaluating potential candidates and not enough consideration on geography.

I could see them targeting the likes of the 2 directional Florida schools, Houston, and Tulane.

That secures the longhorn presence in Houston and puts OU, UT, etc. in front of some of the most fertile recruiting grounds in the SEC. You know, like the SEC did to the Big 12.
 
If the Big XII expands to 12, both schools will be to the east (Cincy, Houston, Memphis...in order of likelihood). If the Big XII expands to 14, I still think it will be to the east (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, UConn).
I don't think the Big XII will settle for any football only members (Sorry BYU and Boise St).
Speaking as a Denver native, CSU does not deliver the Denver market (but more still than Wyoming...sorry fellow Poke fans...talk of Wyoming having a presence in Denver always makes me laugh out loud)
IF BYU decides to give up independence, they will join the American (possibly to replace losses to the Big XII).
Either way, Texas and Oklahoma bolt as soon as they can justify the GOR losses that they will incur and then who knows what will happen.
Wyoming needs to start winning and need to do it soon (Not super optimistic about this year).
 
cowpoke pride said:
If the Big XII expands to 12, both schools will be to the east (Cincy, Houston, Memphis...in order of likelihood). If the Big XII expands to 14, I still think it will be to the east (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, UConn). I don't think the Big XII will settle for any football only members (Sorry BYU and Boise St).

Speaking as a Denver native, CSU does not deliver the Denver market (but more still than Wyoming...sorry fellow Poke fans...talk of Wyoming having a presence in Denver always makes me laugh out loud).

IF BYU decides to give up independence, they will join the American (possibly to replace losses to the Big XII).
Either way, Texas and Oklahoma bolt as soon as they can justify the GOR losses that they will incur and then who knows what will happen.

Wyoming needs to start winning and need to do it soon (Not super optimistic about this year).
Click to expand...

Good post. Hope you are correct on the first part. Last part couldn't be more true.
 
MrTitleist said:
LanderPoke said:
joshvanklomp said:
LanderPoke said:
Some are not like the others. The Dakots and Montana? You haven't been around long enough to say crap like this. I don't even know where to start.
Click to expand...
Again, this has nothing to do with the on-the-field products. I never said Wyoming needs to move down to FCS (because I don't believe that), so not sure why the hostility.
Click to expand...
How else are we going to end up in a conference with the Dakotas and Montana?
Click to expand...

SDSU has a brand new stadium that's going to be pretty sweet, NDSU would love to move up, Montana is probably the most ready FCS school to move-up.. it's not out of the realm of possibility. Esp given the way that college football seems to be shaking out. I've heard one Big Sky coach say to boosters that he wouldn't be surprised if the Big Sky moved up (at least some of the members) to an FBS conference.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this SDSU stadium looks sweet!

CoplM4mUAAAyTvy.jpg
 
Except it's brand new and now holds 16,000+. It'll be one of the better, if not the best, stadium in the MVFC.
 
I'd be asking for my money back. Maybe this is just a bad picture, but I'm not impressed.

For example why benches instead of chairbacks?
 
LanderPoke said:
I'd be asking for my money back. Maybe this is just a bad picture, but I'm not impressed.

For example why benches instead of chairbacks?
Click to expand...
So you can be a dick to visiting fans and put your legs up to take their seats.
 
joshvanklomp said:
Coeur d' Alene said:
you never want a Montana or a Dakota school you want teams big cities that have high potential to become good.
Click to expand...
So reading this, I take it you don't want Wyoming in the Mountain West?
Click to expand...
Not even close. I don't want a Montana or Dakota school in the MW. Im talking about what I want for wyomings conference. I don't want Wyoming thrown out I want the rest of the conference added to
 
joshvanklomp said:
KC_Cowboy1990 said:
Montana is historically relevant at the FCS level, large loyal fanbase, geographical makes sense, academic profile akin to most MW schools, and all UM would have to do is add like 5000 extra seats to their football stadium. But if UM's boosters and administration is not willing to take 1 step backwards to potentially take 2-3 steps forward, that's their prerogative. Don't gamble with scared money.
Click to expand...
I've always thought that Wyoming has more in common with the Montana schools and the Dakota schools than they do with many of the schools in the Mountain West. This has nothing to do with the on-the-field product either, just how I view the institutions themselves from afar.

I know that Wyoming has a deep tradition with CSU and other current MWC opponents, and I understand the perception of "moving down" to team up with these schools could hurt fan support and other things but that's just my opinion. Just as a hypothetical, I think a conference with Wyoming, USU, AFA, UTEP, UNM, NMSU, Montana, MSU, NDSU, UND, SoDakSU, USD could be a really competitive regional league.

I know there will be some eye rolls and some angry retorts after this post, so let me have it.
Click to expand...
This is a university of Wyoming message board. Ideas here should be improvement of wyomings standing. Montana and Dakota schools would not do that. Plus those people all need big fish in small pond feelings. Wyoming people don't need that.
 
joshvanklomp said:
KC_Cowboy1990 said:
Montana is historically relevant at the FCS level, large loyal fanbase, geographical makes sense, academic profile akin to most MW schools, and all UM would have to do is add like 5000 extra seats to their football stadium. But if UM's boosters and administration is not willing to take 1 step backwards to potentially take 2-3 steps forward, that's their prerogative. Don't gamble with scared money.
Click to expand...
I've always thought that Wyoming has more in common with the Montana schools and the Dakota schools than they do with many of the schools in the Mountain West. This has nothing to do with the on-the-field product either, just how I view the institutions themselves from afar.

I know that Wyoming has a deep tradition with CSU and other current MWC opponents, and I understand the perception of "moving down" to team up with these schools could hurt fan support and other things but that's just my opinion. Just as a hypothetical, I think a conference with Wyoming, USU, AFA, UTEP, UNM, NMSU, Montana, MSU, NDSU, UND, SoDakSU, USD could be a really competitive regional league.

I know there will be some eye rolls and some angry retorts after this post, so let me have it.
Click to expand...

You should go research this a bit further. Wyoming and the Dakota's/ Montana's don't really have that much in common in academics, sports, or endowments. They serve different missions.

I just don't see much of what they would have in common besides sharing borders.
 
Sorry, I forgot my posts can only be by Coeur D'Alene's definition of pro-Wyoming. I'll add it to the list of posting requirements, as well as the previous anti-Bohl requirements of this board.

I'm sorry for having an opinion. It'll never happen again.
 
Coeur d' Alene said:
s: Mountain West needs to be expanding as well. Houston BYU Wichita and Gonzaga.
Step 2- long besan, pepperdine,san francisco denver. Then figure out if you want another texas school weather it's all paso smu . I think you want tulane
Click to expand...
So Montana (176.9m) doesn't have a big enough endowment, but Gonzaga (185.6m), Long Beach State (57.2m) and UTEP (151.2m) do?

And yet, if that's as important as you think to these schools, you expect Houston (716.4m) and BYU (1.47b) to ignore all that to team up with a much smaller Wyoming, which also means joining a conference with SJSU (120m), Fresno State (166m), etc?

Works both ways.
 
You want more research? Which of these sets more closely resembles a town with a population of 32,000?

San Jose, CA 998,000
Las Vegas, NV 603,000
Albuquerque, NM 556,000
Fresno, CA 509,000
Honolulu, HI 375,000
Reno, NV 233,000
Boise, ID 215,000

OR

Fargo, ND 113,000
Missoula, MT 69,000
Grand Forks, ND 55,000
Bozeman, MT 40,000
Brookings, SD 23,000
Vermillion, SD 11,000
 
Going to FCS means losing scholarships and having Big Time programs like Nebraska and Texas come to Laramie. We have a die-hard base of fans that will support Wyoming no matter what (I include myself in that category) but just having FCS schools come to Laramie will make driving to the games much less desirable for the casual fan and thus cut attendance. Going to FCS is a revenue loser in my opinion.
 
If this is a Wyoming Cowboy board, then by proxy what makes the MWC a better conference, has everything to do with Wyoming and it's athletic department. There isn't a flaming snowballs chance in hell Wyoming gets into a P5 conference any time soon. Entertaining that thought is a lot crazier than entertaining the thought of Montana, NDSU, or UTEP being good additions to help bulk up conference prestige in the MWC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top