OT: Idaho/New Mexico State get the ax

[Coeur d' Alene]

Wyo/csu/AFA/nm
Houston/Tulane/Navy/SMU
Boise/BYU/IDAHO/Utah st
Utep/nmsu/t/rice/Tulsa
UNLV/Nevada/Fresno/San Jose
Sdsu/Hawaii/Portland/Davis


Gonzaga/Wichita/Denver/San fransisco/Seattle/long beach/Pepperdine/Alaska also added

Football: the first conference to wipe out 3 conferences and have a 16 team playoff football format. 4 different stadium "regions" and a title game rotating between NFL Stadiums in Houston, Dallas, San Diego, San fransisco, L.A., Denver, New Orleans. All cities in the new MWC media markets. Round of 8 and 4 teams go to Las Vegas and/or Honolulu

Every team plays 8 conference games and 2 ooc with a rule not allowing playing 1AA teams. Then the 8 teams not in the bracket would play a little toilet bowl tourney when the 16 team playoff started. Imagine the interest and how it could change the NCAA if the MWC had a bracket like this example

Houston Region at Texans stadium
1-Houston 2- navy
4- SMU 3-Tulsa

LA region and Rams stadium
1-BYU 2- San Diego st
4-Hawaii 3- Wyoming

Seattle region Seahawks stadium
1-Boise St 2- Utah st
4- Fresno st 3- Nevada

Denver region
1- AFA 2- UNLV
4- Tulane 3- New Mexico


Then to Vegas for

BYU vs Wyoming
Houston vs Navy
Boise vs Utah state
Air Force vs New Mexico

You telling me those 4 games on 1 24 hour period wouldn't be amazing attendance and television


On to Hawaii for
Wyoming vs Houston
Boise vs Air Force

And then I wouldn't really care which stadium Wyoming kicks Boise states ass in.

Superconference and playoff football. The answer for this conference

 

[J-Rod]

That looks like it would cost a lot of money.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

You telling me those 4 games on 1 24 hour period wouldn't be amazing attendance and television

Yes, I would tell you that. Attendance would/could be good for some of the games, but there would be zero television interest unless it is a matchup of a few top 10 (maybe top 15) teams.

There is no TV interest for the majority of G5 or even lower level P5. It is what it is.

 

[Coeur d' Alene]

You telling me those 4 games on 1 24 hour period wouldn't be amazing attendance and television

Yes, I would tell you that. Attendance would/could be good for some of the games, but there would be zero television interest unless it is a matchup of a few top 10 (maybe top 15) teams.

There is no TV interest for the majority of G5 or even lower level P5. It is what it is.

If you believe that Wyoming/BYU plus Boise st, New Mexico and others would pack Sam Boyd stadium I'd disagree. I can't call you completely wrong about TV viewing. But this plan is about the future and not the past, and adding la, sf, Denver, Houston, Dallas, and New Orleans to the existing sd, lv, albq, parts of Colorado and parts of Utah should make a huge difference.

My plan is selfish because of my love for UW basketball. And an interest in UW footbLl. I live in Coeur d Alene Idaho. So I want Idaho and Gonzaga. I work in Denver and Houston. So I want Houston, rice (I'm not sure they're a good answer, but they are rich as hell). Mostly I want UW to be in the best spot possible. I don't think expansion would weaken Wyoming position. I think it would help

 

[Coeur d' Alene]

Doesn't mean I like it, but wouldn't be shocked to see one or both in the Mountain West.

I know everyone thinks the Mountain West is way better than them, but sometimes, these moves happen for more reasons than just on-field/on-court ability.

MW politics 101: there isn't a chance in hell Boise State allows Idaho into the MW. This was attempted in 2012 and and the MW gave a stern no.

The state of idahos funding of either program trumps the MWC politics. Idaho politics: they want both schools in the same league/division and they want them playing each other. If the state government of Idaho had to select 1 school over the other? They'd send one back to a junior college.

 

[J-Rod]

The state of idahos funding of either program trumps the MWC politics. Idaho politics: they want both schools in the same league/division and they want them playing each other. If the state government of Idaho had to select 1 school over the other? They'd send one back to a junior college.

lol this makes sense.....in 1997. Nearly everyone is urging Idaho to go back to the Big Sky full time (it is already there for all non-football sports). The SBOE has been decidedly biased towards BSU for years now. They stopped caring what Idaho thought in terms of sports a long time ago. From funding to government support, one has had its way without resistance...the other can barely continue to breath.

The Vandals haven't been proactive for a long time. They're paying for it now. I'm guessing they'll accept the standing invite to the Big Sky in football this summer. Last I read the big money boosters and alums want this, but there is still a large part of the fanbase that will be furious moving back to the Big Sky.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

If you believe that Wyoming/BYU plus Boise st, New Mexico and others would pack Sam Boyd stadium I'd disagree. I can't call you completely wrong about TV viewing. But this plan is about the future and not the past, and adding la, sf, Denver, Houston, Dallas, and New Orleans to the existing sd, lv, albq, parts of Colorado and parts of Utah should make a huge difference.

Oh I think attendance for the most part would be good under your proposed scenario, but attendance doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things. Selling out even a 100K stadium would be a drop in the bucket to the TV market evaluations. Think about some of the worst TV ratings and they are a lot more than 100K (in general).

TV is what drives revenue and revenue drives alignments and such. Well, it used to for us. The writing is on the wall and that is ending. In that not too distant future, those (WYO fans) that take pride in just playing against whatever competition in whatever format will still be happy. Those that liked the opportunity to play against the big boys and the potential to play in big bowls (read NY6 bid here) are going to be sorely disappointed.

 

[Coeur d' Alene]

If you believe that Wyoming/BYU plus Boise st, New Mexico and others would pack Sam Boyd stadium I'd disagree. I can't call you completely wrong about TV viewing. But this plan is about the future and not the past, and adding la, sf, Denver, Houston, Dallas, and New Orleans to the existing sd, lv, albq, parts of Colorado and parts of Utah should make a huge difference.

Oh I think attendance for the most part would be good under your proposed scenario, but attendance doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things. Selling out even a 100K stadium would be a drop in the bucket to the TV market evaluations. Think about some of the worst TV ratings and they are a lot more than 100K (in general).

TV is what drives revenue and revenue drives alignments and such. Well, it used to for us. The writing is on the wall and that is ending. In that not too distant future, those (WYO fans) that take pride in just playing against whatever competition in whatever format will still be happy. Those that liked the opportunity to play against the big boys and the potential to play in big bowls (read NY6 bid here) are going to be sorely disappointed.

That's why I propose moving into Seattle, Spokane, Portland, San fransisco, Denver, Houston, Dallas, and New Orleans

 

[WyoBrandX]

Ifd.

That's why I propose moving into Seattle, Spokane, Portland, San fransisco, Denver, Houston, Dallas, and New Orleans

Do you think our athletic director cares? You are 100% right - let's move the brand and advertise it more. I don't think ol Tom Burman gives a shit. He makes 200+k a year. He is saving it up to find a warm spot at some point in his life.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

That's why I propose moving into Seattle, Spokane, Portland, San fransisco, Denver, Houston, Dallas, and New Orleans

P5 vs. G5. Look at the other G5 conferences who could technically claim several big markets, but the G5 doesn't generate interest. That is why all of our TV deals are crap compared to the big dogs.

You could put every G5 team in a conference and the overall TV contract might go up. However, the money per team will not.

Enjoy what we have now because it will get worse unless of course you like the idea of our own FCS-like division.

 

[Coeur d' Alene]

I don't understand most of that but I'd like you to explain more. Which non P5 schools have all these markets but don't succeed? Wouldn't improving in all those markets give a better chance?


Creating the tiers is what it should be about. Admit being Lowe then PAC12 but then draw a line saying in the west if you aren't PAC 12 and you aren't mw you aren't a real (d1) team.


I just think Wyoming specifically and the whole MWC could benefit from a change.


I want wyo to have chance of success at highest level possible. I'd like a bball division of wyo/csu/AFA/Denver. Because I think Wyoming could be the cream of the crop.

I want a football division that plays csu Air Force and prob New Mexico forever. I want a way where when things are good we get a shot at BYU, Boise. And when things are ok I want trips to Las Vegas Honolulu

And adding la, sf, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, and Portland is a lot better if an idea than a sun belt, wac, or AAC conference can come up with

 

[ragtimejoe1]

What I'm getting at is that the P5 distinction trumps everything. Of the markets you list, la, sf, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, and Portland, they are already fully controlled by the P5 (LA: UCLA/USC; SF: not sure on this but guessing Stanford, USC, and UCLA would cover most of that; Houston and Dallas: TAMU and TX; Seattle and Portland: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State).

The money in those markets just isn't there for the G5 otherwise consolidation would have happened already.
There are a lot of G5 teams in big markets, but they still don't bring much money. For example, SJSU, SDSU, and Fresno are in or near big markets. However, traditionally, they really haven't been the main drivers in TV contracts. Another good example is TCU; the P5 label has done wonders for them and their value to a TV contract.

I'm not saying your idea is bad, just that as things continue to separate the G5 from the P5, we are going to find ourselves in a situation where there isn't much money like FCS. We are already there, but it will likely get worse.

 

[Lost Poke]

What I'm getting at is that the P5 distinction trumps everything. Of the markets you list, la, sf, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, and Portland, they are already fully controlled by the P5 (LA: UCLA/USC; SF: not sure on this but guessing Stanford, USC, and UCLA would cover most of that; Houston and Dallas: TAMU and TX; Seattle and Portland: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State).

The money in those markets just isn't there for the G5 otherwise consolidation would have happened already.
There are a lot of G5 teams in big markets, but they still don't bring much money. For example, SJSU, SDSU, and Fresno are in or near big markets. However, traditionally, they really haven't been the main drivers in TV contracts. Another good example is TCU; the P5 label has done wonders for them and their value to a TV contract.

I'm not saying your idea is bad, just that as things continue to separate the G5 from the P5, we are going to find ourselves in a situation where there isn't much money like FCS. We are already there, but it will likely get worse.

This.

Non-P5 schools in the various large markets would already be in a P5 conference or part of a major TV contract if they brought a significant audience to a broadcaster. Just adding teams in a market delivers nothing - see WAC16

 

[Wyokie]

What I'm getting at is that the P5 distinction trumps everything. Of the markets you list, la, sf, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, and Portland, they are already fully controlled by the P5 (LA: UCLA/USC; SF: not sure on this but guessing Stanford, USC, and UCLA would cover most of that; Houston and Dallas: TAMU and TX; Seattle and Portland: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State).

The money in those markets just isn't there for the G5 otherwise consolidation would have happened already.
There are a lot of G5 teams in big markets, but they still don't bring much money. For example, SJSU, SDSU, and Fresno are in or near big markets. However, traditionally, they really haven't been the main drivers in TV contracts. Another good example is TCU; the P5 label has done wonders for them and their value to a TV contract.

I'm not saying your idea is bad, just that as things continue to separate the G5 from the P5, we are going to find ourselves in a situation where there isn't much money like FCS. We are already there, but it will likely get worse.

This.

Non-P5 schools in the various large markets would already be in a P5 conference or part of a major TV contract if they brought a significant audience to a broadcaster. Just adding teams in a market delivers nothing - see WAC16

And we all know the WAC-16 experiment was a complete disaster!!!!!!! :roll: Nice idea in theory but..... :roll: :roll:

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Any updates on this or are both just going Indy?