Estimated MWC Vs PAC12 $$ Numbers

[LawPoke]

Not sure how I feel about that - if true. I will miss playing in the same conference as Donkie State and CSewe, but I don't give a shit about the others, including WOSU.

I don't really know either. Unfortunately, the primary consideration is money, so the rivalries and history are second thoughts. I regret not being with CSU - the rest are in two camps for me: 1) glad they are gone because I think they are untrustworthy, crapweasels (Utah State, SDSU, boize); and 2) teams I never cared about (Fresneck, W/OSU).

I will only add that my contact was bummed Burman (apparently) canned the move as they saw more long-term upside being aligned with the PAC and its brand. I can see several different views on that subject.

 

[LanderPoke]

I have heard through a fairly reliable source that Wyoming WAS offered to join and Burman counseled to decline the offer. Heard that from someone close to UW. Can anyone confirm?

First I have heard of this.

 

[PorkerPoke]

I would be very surprised if an offer was made.

Also, when was the purported offer made? After UNLV and Air Force said no?

Numerous references to Wyoming being included with SJSU, UNM and Nevada in the “group of not wanted” in the pee12 can be found. For the MWC to disband, 9 votes were needed but the pee12 group did not want to be associated with the 4 listed above (Hawaii was not a full member). That means the pee12 would have needed UNLV, AFA and 2 of Wyoming, SJSU, UNM or Nevada to get the 9 needed to vote to disband. There is a reason why UNLV and AFA get premium kickbacks while the rest get equal amounts.

Wyoming is basically seen as a weak member because our programs don’t return anything financially to the MWC (CFP or NCAA’s) nor does Wyoming invoke national attention with a college sport. We are the takers and followers in the MWC.

I am rather skeptical that there is substance to this purported offer. If Wyoming was on the radar screen with an active offer it wouldn’t be finally revealed almost 1 year after the traitor 5 openly said they were going last September 2024.

No disrespect to you LawPoke, but I as well have some contacts with UW and have heard nothing. My guess is Wyoming was asked by the MWC and supported a continuation of the scheduling agreement and pursuit of a pee2 merger. That is the higher level discussion I have heard. Could that have been misinterpreted as a 2024 pee12 offer?

Secrets are kept tight at Wyoming just like no head coaches sons were placed in key coaching positions. Either son being nothing more than they were the best choices for the future of the programs. I have no knowledge of those hires being anything more than carefully analyzed hires from a review of available candidates and I think ragtime will fully concur!

Anything is possible, but I don’t have any hints Wyoming was ever on the pee12 radar from what I can piece together. If wrong, I apologize in advance.

 

[LawPoke]

Numerous references to Wyoming being included with SJSU, UNM and Nevada in the “group of not wanted” in the pee12 can be found. For the MWC to disband, 9 votes were needed but the pee12 group did not want to be associated with the 4 listed above (Hawaii was not a full member). That means the pee12 would have needed UNLV, AFA and 2 of Wyoming, SJSU, UNM or Nevada to get the 9 needed to vote to disband. There is a reason why UNLV and AFA get premium kickbacks while the rest get equal amounts.

Wyoming is basically seen as a weak member because our programs don’t return anything financially to the MWC (CFP or NCAA’s) nor does Wyoming invoke national attention with a college sport. We are the takers and followers in the MWC.

I am rather skeptical that there is substance to this purported offer. If Wyoming was on the radar screen with an active offer it wouldn’t be finally revealed almost 1 year after the traitor 5 openly said they were going last September 2024.

No disrespect to you LawPoke, but I as well have some contacts with UW and have heard nothing. My guess is Wyoming was asked by the MWC and supported a continuation of the scheduling agreement and pursuit of a pee2 merger. That is the higher level discussion I have heard. Could that have been misinterpreted as a 2024 pee12 offer?

Secrets are kept tight at Wyoming just like no head coaches sons were placed in key coaching positions. Either son being nothing more than they were the best choices for the future of the programs. I have no knowledge of those hires being anything more than carefully analyzed hires from a review of available candidates and I think ragtime will fully concur!

Anything is possible, but I don’t have any hints Wyoming was ever on the pee12 radar from what I can piece together. If wrong, I apologize in advance.

I was actually surprised by the comment myself. It was the first I had heard it. That said, the person that told me was firm that the offer was made and Burman said no. I asked twice.

I would say two things: 1) I doubt Burman had a veto (if he did, UW is more dysfunctional than even I know); and 2) if an offer was made a year ago, UW would have no doubt been scared by the cost of poker (exit fee, penalties, ongoing litigation, etc) and, if history is a guide, likely would have taken the least risky path.

I will say I am a little skeptical. UW doesn’t add much to the PAC and likely would have cost them more than we are worth in all reality. I will also say that in 5 years, it will be the BIG and SEC and then everyone else. So we might be among the tallest or shortest midgets, but we will still be midgets - likely with all of us midgets separated by a couple mil, give or take, in gross revenue.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Secrets are kept tight at Wyoming just like no head coaches sons were placed in key coaching positions. Either son being nothing more than they were the best choices for the future of the programs. I have no knowledge of those hires being anything more than carefully analyzed hires from a review of available candidates and I think ragtime will fully concur!

Well, that's certainly the dogma around here!

 

[ragtimejoe1]

For the topic, if and HUGE if, a possible invite were floated, and playing devil's advocate here, maybe the decision to remain in the MWC had some merit 1) uncertainty surrounding buyouts, affordability, etc as others have pointed out 2) couldn't or wouldn't meet long-term financial investments required by the pac 3) competitive disadvantage in the pac 4) didn't want to be wsu's and osu's bitches and 5) maintaining the MWC ensured penalties remained.

I could see a scenario where they would try to take about anyone to destroy the MWC and save over 100 million. I can also see where alliances in the MWC were made and we were part of that with the idea of extracting the exit penalties/poaching fees was the better route with the near certain shake-up of the college football landscape within the 5 or 6 years.

Who knows. I'm sure there were a lot of moving parts. Hopefully we eventually are informed of all the details.

 

[LawPoke]

For the topic, if and HUGE if, a possible invite were floated, and playing devil's advocate here, maybe the decision to remain in the MWC had some merit 1) uncertainty surrounding buyouts, affordability, etc as others have pointed out 2) couldn't or wouldn't meet long-term financial investments required by the pac 3) competitive disadvantage in the pac 4) didn't want to be wsu's and osu's bitches and 5) maintaining the MWC ensured penalties remained.

I could see a scenario where they would try to take about anyone to destroy the MWC and save over 100 million. I can also see where alliances in the MWC were made and we were part of that with the idea of extracting the exit penalties/poaching fees was the better route with the near certain shake-up of the college football landscape within the 5 or 6 years.

Who knows. I'm sure there were a lot of moving parts. Hopefully we eventually are informed of all the details.

I think that this is how UNLV and AFA viewed the PAC offer.

 

[307bball]

Secrets are kept tight at Wyoming just like no head coaches sons were placed in key coaching positions. Either son being nothing more than they were the best choices for the future of the programs. I have no knowledge of those hires being anything more than carefully analyzed hires from a review of available candidates and I think ragtime will fully concur!

If ragtime ever starts fully concurring with me...I think I'll have to have myself committed

 

[evilpoke]

For the topic, if and HUGE if, a possible invite were floated, and playing devil's advocate here, maybe the decision to remain in the MWC had some merit 1) uncertainty surrounding buyouts, affordability, etc as others have pointed out 2) couldn't or wouldn't meet long-term financial investments required by the pac 3) competitive disadvantage in the pac 4) didn't want to be wsu's and osu's bitches and 5) maintaining the MWC ensured penalties remained.

I could see a scenario where they would try to take about anyone to destroy the MWC and save over 100 million. I can also see where alliances in the MWC were made and we were part of that with the idea of extracting the exit penalties/poaching fees was the better route with the near certain shake-up of the college football landscape within the 5 or 6 years.

Who knows. I'm sure there were a lot of moving parts. Hopefully we eventually are informed of all the details.

I would also say the PAC move is looking like fools gold. Normally when you move conferences, it's a slam dunk, no brainer.

No one can definitely say that CSU is in a better position than Wyoming right now.

 

[Steamboat]

I would also say the PAC move is looking like fools gold. Normally when you move conferences, it's a slam dunk, no brainer.

No one can definitely say that CSU is in a better position than Wyoming right now.

Agree with your statement except, every CSU student and their supporters would say they are deserving and in a better position than Wyoming.

 

[evilpoke]

Agree with your statement except, every CSU student and their supporters would say they are deserving and in a better position than Wyoming.

It's not the first time CSU has been wrong.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I would also say the PAC move is looking like fools gold. Normally when you move conferences, it's a slam dunk, no brainer.

No one can definitely say that CSU is in a better position than Wyoming right now.

Agree with your statement except, every CSU student and their supporters would say they are deserving and in a better position than Wyoming.

Imo, the jury is out for about 5 to 10 years. If the top split off and we end up in the same situation as the pac, then really bad for them. If the split results in 3 levels and the mwc ends up in the bottom level, then bad for us.

I think they carry more risk of paying penalties and their top 2 or so teams get poached down the road.

The other thing is that most of those teams have found some success. For that to continue, there will have to be a lot of parity = no chance at playoffs in near term. Alternatively and most likely, some teams will regress to perennial bottom dwellers. It will be interesting to say the least