• 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!

Here's a question (about expansion)

W

wellpoke

Well-known member
Why does it feel like CU is trying to get in front of something? Why would they announce their change before any of the other schools that are supposedly jumping to the Pac-10? Maybe I'm being a bit paranoid, but is this a bid by the Big 12 to get rid of Nebraska and CU to bring in two other schools, like maybe BYU and Utah?

This is why I think the conference should have invited Boise when they had the opportunity. Instead of a "hurry-up-and-wait" attitude, they could have been proactive and put the MWC in a position to retain all of its members. But, I suppose it wouldn't be the end of the world if my scenario played out. We could still invite Boise and maybe Fresno or Houston and probably be ok. Again, just my two cents.

GO POKES!
 
It would indeed have been nice to already have invited Boise State and had them accept. IF Utah, BYU and/or Air Force gets stolen between Pac-10 and Big 12, the remaining MWC would all of a sudden be very weak, and TCU would likely bail somewhere too.
 
Asmodeanreborn said:
It would indeed have been nice to already have invited Boise State and had them accept. IF Utah, BYU and/or Air Force gets stolen between Pac-10 and Big 12, the remaining MWC would all of a sudden be very weak, and TCU would likely bail somewhere too.
Click to expand...

If the Texas schools leave - The Big 12 is dead and the Pac-10's move to grab CU is a good indication that they hope/expect to pick up the other 5 Big 12 schools on their list. I just don't see the Pac-10 grabbing Utah over any of those schools. I also think that the AFA claims are far fetched. AFA is a prestigious academy but they don't really have a huge travelling fan base and I don't see the financial gain for the Big 12. I would say the most likely scenario is the Big 12 folds, with CU and NE already bailing the other schools are going to jump at the first best opportunity to distance themselves from what looks to be a collapsing conference.
 
I just don't think Texas really wants to leave the Big 12, and may try to keep the other institutions around and just replace CU and NE. I don't believe the Pac-10 wants Utah either, but I think the Big 12 could if they decide to try and stick it out. And I don't believe Utah would go anywhere without BYU, which makes them a good pickup for the Big 12 in this scenario.

It just doesn't feel right with CU trying to get out in front of this. They've wanted the Pac-10 forever, and I think they want to guarantee they get it regardless of what the Texas contingent decides to do. I hope the Big 12 blows up the way everyone seems to think it will. But if not, I think it leaves the MWC open to trouble that could have potentially been prevented.
 
The reason why CU jumped now was that they didn't want to get left behind due to Texas politics wanting Baylor to be a part of the Big 12 South package heading to the PAC-10.
 
Wyokie said:
The reason why CU jumped now was that they didn't want to get left behind due to Texas politics wanting Baylor to be a part of the Big 12 South package heading to the PAC-10.
Click to expand...

This is correct. People here (CU graduates) were very worried that Baylor would somehow jump into the mix, leaving CU behind.
 
Having family in Texas, I can tell you that Baylor is figuring very little in Texas', A&M's and Tech's decision. Baylor was lucky to be included in the Big 12, and had Ann Richards (a Baylor grad) not been gov at the time, it probably wouldn't have happened.

Regardless, it sounds more and more like my fears were just paranoia, and that the Big 12 will end up imploding, leaving Kansas, Kstate, Iowa and Iowa State holding the bag. It just came out (on the "other" board) that ESPN was told that OK St is going to the Pac-10. Of course, it's not official yet, but the dominoes will fall. They won't go without Ok, who won't go without Texas, who won't go without A&M, etc.

I think as long as this all goes down and the Big 12 does go away, it's the best possible scenario for the MWC. So, then the question is, do we take all of what's left of the Big 12 and go to 14? Or do we had Boise, Kansas, and K state and stick to 12? I think the latter, if it all plays out the right way.

GO POKES!
 
No no no no no, i dont see why everyone says we would want KU and KSU. I would only be in favor if they bring more money to our schools either by tv market share, buy-in, etc. why the hell would we bale them out and split what little money we get with them? BSU inproves our BCS position the KS school dont. Unless they make us more money, they can go CUSA or WAC for all I care.

someone please explain why we would want the KS schools (or Missouri) If there is no financial gain why do it?
 
I'm not opposed to your idea Fullback. but if I understand things correctly, going to 12 instead of 10 allows us to host a championship game, and strengthens the case for AQ status to the BCS. Of course, that may all be moot if the Big 12 goes down, opening up the AQ position anyway. Plus, there are other sports to think about. Even though football does drive the bus, there are some pretty good basketball programs at those Kansas schools.
 
Fullback41 said:
No no no no no, i dont see why everyone says we would want KU and KSU. I would only be in favor if they bring more money to our schools either by tv market share, buy-in, etc. why the hell would we bale them out and split what little money we get with them? BSU inproves our BCS position the KS school dont. Unless they make us more money, they can go CUSA or WAC for all I care.

someone please explain why we would want the KS schools (or Missouri) If there is no financial gain why do it?
Click to expand...
Most people want KU for their basketball (plus that Orange Bowl they went to). The catch is, K-state is joined at the hip with them. Though, the K-state fans at least seem willing to come to the MWC. KU fans are being little hypocrites that want nothing to do with the MWC if they can help it.
 
Fullback41 said:
No no no no no, i dont see why everyone says we would want KU and KSU. I would only be in favor if they bring more money to our schools either by tv market share, buy-in, etc. why the hell would we bale them out and split what little money we get with them? BSU inproves our BCS position the KS school dont. Unless they make us more money, they can go CUSA or WAC for all I care.

someone please explain why we would want the KS schools (or Missouri) If there is no financial gain why do it?
Click to expand...


I'm with you FB41. I would rather have BSU. Our conference is pretty solid and getting stronger. If the Kansas schools don't want us except as a last resort, I don't want them. If we want to go to 12, BSU then Houston & maybe Iowa St. or Missouri (if they want the MWC).
 
thanks the 12 teams, champ game, and I forgot about the Ks BCS bowl game already, it makes more sense to me now.

by the way im on vacation visiting family in south carolina, drinking a newcastle beer, waiting for dinner.

i am surrounded by gamecocks and clemson tiger fans.
 
With what I hear here in Kansas, KU and KSU might consider the MWC. And I think that would be great. For one, They do have tv markets down here (Wichita, topeka, and Kansas City, okla city isn't far away either. Nor is Lincoln Neb, or Des Moines Iow.) Just think if we started getting those Missou recruits with Christensen! On top of that, There are more sports than just football in a conference. basketball is a great market as well. Just use last years results and you have KU, KSU, UNM, BYU, UNLV all ranked and SDS receiving votes. Iowa st honestly offers nothing, The big 12 looks up to Baylor before they do ISU. I don't understand why everyone wants to keep going after these bottom of the barrel teams. Seriously, Houston? Iowa St? That's like saying let's take Louisiana Tech over Boise from the WAC just because they have recently had some success. What does ISU give us? Houston? Neither have had any contention for BCS in football, and neither are that good at basketball. Are we going to take them for track and Field? Tennis maybe?
And if your going to say that it will help recruiting, please tell me how going to tCU every other year and getting beat down has helped us get any recruits? Recruiting doesn't happen with who's in your league, it's the coaches on your team and who they influence. That's all there is to it. Case in point, CSU has not played anybody from Florida in years (if ever), yet they have recruited four players from there in the past two years. Hmmm?
 
I as well don't understand the Iowa St. or Houston argument. They don't bring much. I'm not sure the MWC will get both Kansas schools, wait and see. If the MWC adds Boise(which I think is a must), and then either KSU and KU, or Fresno St. and Nevada, it could only strenghten their case for AQ status.
 
msuhunter said:
I as well don't understand the Iowa St. or Houston argument. They don't bring much. I'm not sure the MWC will get both Kansas schools, wait and see. If the MWC adds Boise(which I think is a must), and then either KSU and KU, or Fresno St. and Nevada, it could only strenghten their case for AQ status.
Click to expand...

houston for
A. Gives TCU a travel partner
B. Opens up a new market in Texas for recruits, tv, etc.
C. Been goining traction, especially in football and they are building a new stadium and maybe a new b-ball arena.
 
Again, from what I stated above. How does this increase recruiting for us? Let me get this straight, We go and play houston in front of about 24,000 fans. if this happens to be on tv maybe , maybe... 1/10 of Houston and surrounding areas are watching, if that. (Most will be watching Texas, Tech, A&M, TCU and Baylor) If you remember We had TCU, SMU, Utep and Rice in the WAC. Amazingly enough, no help with recruiting. No, again, recruiting comes down to your coaches and HOW well they influence.
What does building new facilities have to do with anything? They have a 32,000 seat stadium now, in the middle of a city and can't fill it.
In the past 10 years they have gone 60-64 (it's like adding another New Mexico, they do well then slump)
TV exposure? yeah, People will have the capability to watch us. But, they will more than likely be watching the bigger Texas schools.
 
Helps recruiting because we have an established presence down there.. so if you're playing down there every other year, then you can say, "hey.. you have the chance to play close to home. And.. we're better than Houston.. come play for us. They hump goats when they're not at practice." It's tougher to recruit when your team is never in said state.. so since Wyoming never plays in Florida, it's hard to tell a FL recruit, "hey, come play in Wyoming. We'll never visit your home state, nor will any of your fellow statesmen come play for us." Where that would be different w/ Texas. That's how I translate it, I'm sure someone on here can present it better than I.
 
I can understand presence, if you go down and win every other year. I also understand Telling a recruit that he could play close to home four times in his career (tcu, houston).
But if thats the case Why do we get several recruits from Oklahoma and Kansas every year? Or even Indiana and Illinois? We have not gone and played in any of those states in years, if ever in some of them. But we manage recruits out of them.
We show presence at UNLV every other year (everyone I always talk to tells me that Las Vegas is a great recruiting area) yet, no recruits from Nevada that I know of. New Mexico is the same way.
Not trying to argue, just a good debate.
 
I think some of those recruits we get from Oklahoma, Kansas, & Illinois are the result of Dave Christensen having been a coach at Missouri and him bringing some other assistants with him. They had recruited that area for years and had some inroads and contacts there. One of our assistants is Polynesian and as a result we got our first Polynesian recruit this year for the first time in many years. It's like advertising for a company - you have to get your name out there or they don't know you exist. Getting some more inroads into Texas for recruiting will help. Texas has many more quality recruits available than Northern Nevada.
 
Montana St. has had a solid Texas recruiting base the last several years and it's not because we play down there (except for the $$ game against Texas A&M). The key is having someone on the staff who can recruit that area and focuses on those players, not adding some sub-par football program.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top