How long until we take BSU and KU/KSU?

[pastorfrog]

I am picking June 17th as the date at which we will announce the addition of AT LEAST BSU, and maybe even Kansas and K-State.

Welcome to the Sun Belt Baylor. Iowa State (where I live) needs to get in touch with UNI. Mizzou? Good question.

 

[Gunner]

Why would you want Kansas or K State (no airport)? Maybe Kansas for basketball and their football team is a little better lately, says ESPN.

For sure don't want Baylor, Iowa State, Missouri.

Boise and Kansas would be only options.

 

[McFroggin]

Conference already talked and agreed not to add BSU at this time. Why add them now?

KU won't come without KSU. They are a package.

We need to try and pick up KU, KSU, and Missouri now.

 

[HUT-Frog]

Boise State will be by June 30.

Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State all will wait to see what happens in the Big East.

Baylor, like it or not, could wind up in the MWC (with KU, KSU and ISU) in exchange for AQ status.

Baylor wouldn't fall below C-USA. Banowsky would give his left testicle to have BU. (C-USA might be looking at a split then, as the eastern schools are tired of the Texas schools anyway.)

 

[Gunner]

QUOTE(McFroggin @ Jun 10 2010, 06:19 PM) [snapback]573925[/snapback]
Conference already talked and agreed not to add BSU at this time. Why add them now?

KU won't come without KSU. They are a package.

We need to try and pick up KU, KSU, and Missouri now.


They are pitiful, so why????? Their cast off's, don't you get it?

 

[EEFrog]

QUOTE(Gunner @ Jun 10 2010, 02:03 PM) [snapback]573993[/snapback]
They are pitiful, so why????? Their cast off's, don't you get it?


Every single team in the MWC is a cast off. If we weren't, then TCU/BYU/UU would be in the expansion talks right now. The whole purpose for adding these teams is to create a buffer between the upper and lower echelons in the MWC right now. Boise/KSU/KU/Mizzou are all better than UNLV, UNM, SDSU, and Wyoming, and their addition would reduce the talks that there isn't enough competition in the MWC to give it BCS standing. Perception is reality, and since all the teams being talked about for addition are for the most part household names, they are perceived as being better.

 

[weklfrog]

QUOTE(pastorfrog @ Jun 10 2010, 10:52 AM) [snapback]573875[/snapback]
I am picking June 17th as the date at which we will announce the addition of AT LEAST BSU, and maybe even Kansas and K-State.

Welcome to the Sun Belt Baylor. Iowa State (where I live) needs to get in touch with UNI. Mizzou? Good question.

PastorFrog -- so you live in Ames? I have a small piece of some family farmland just down the road from Ames (near Alleman/Ankeny). I think an aunt, a retired UCC pastor, lives in Ames.

 

[HUT-Frog]

QUOTE(Gunner @ Jun 10 2010, 02:03 PM) [snapback]573993[/snapback]
They are pitiful, so why????? Their cast off's, don't you get it?


TCU was a castoff -- twice. :blush:

 

[byuhog]

I like the idea of a 12 team MWC conference with BSU and KU and K-st. Basketball would become brutally hard for some MWC teams though...

KU has b een doing better in football lately and should be a decent program. K-st has touched greatness, floundered and occasionally shows getting back to form. They have a very strong fan base and travel well. Likely more K-st fans coming to a TCU game in Ft. Worth, than BYU perhaps...

I really wouldn't want to add Baylor. Basketball, okay. Football, no. They'd be like another WYoming or at best AF. Iowa st? Ehhh... Not too excited there.

SMU? They had better get a good deal stronger under Jones and haven't been that impressive over the long term scenario.

If the MWC was wild enough to have a 16 team conference-the three above and then:

Houston, Fresno-st, Nevada, maybe Utep. Not sure about Nevada or Utep but hey-not many choices there. NV could beat Baylor in football. Utep could beat em too.

The key thing is NOT adding teams that water the conference down more overall. No need to expand just for the sake of expanding, but rather strengthening the conference-through better football or a combo(KU, basketball) OR tv market-Houston, etc...

Ah yes-what about Tulsa? Would you rather have Tulsa, Utep or Nevada in a far out expanded scenario? All those teams would jump to the MWC I think if offered.

There are some other solid teams out there(Houston, Fresno-st, etc..), but those other ones aren't upgrades over the big-3 in the MWC, IMO.

The other thing would be to go to 12 team conference with a championship game-add BSU, K-st and KU and kick out a couple of icky teams like SDS and Wyoming or UNLV and replace with stronger options-aka-Houston, Tulsa, even SMU, Mizzou, etc.. Then the MWC would be looking pretty dang good as a conference. Not that the MWC is anything to sneeze at. It's solid already, but could at least use a boost from adding BSU....

I'm glad Nebrasky is jumping after all. It's forcing a massive domino effect through the CF landscape and the MWC looks to benefit IMO.