IanforHeisman
New Member
Would you rather go back to CUSA or stay?
If BYU and Utah left and were replaced by Boise St and Fresno...
- Thread starter IanforHeisman
- Start date
Kaiser
New Member
QUOTE(IanforHeisman @ May 1 2010, 06:53 PM) [snapback]553985[/snapback]
Would you rather go back to CUSA or stay?
Without BYU the MWC isn't all that special. BYU is the engine that drives the conference. BSU is an easy replacement for Utah though the quality of television would go way down. I'd say its a tossup. A MWC without BYU and Utah might not be worth the additional tracel costs for non revenue sports plus MWC baseball would actually manage to get worse.
Would you rather go back to CUSA or stay?
Without BYU the MWC isn't all that special. BYU is the engine that drives the conference. BSU is an easy replacement for Utah though the quality of television would go way down. I'd say its a tossup. A MWC without BYU and Utah might not be worth the additional tracel costs for non revenue sports plus MWC baseball would actually manage to get worse.
icemonkee
New Member
Adding BSU, Fresno, and a third team that plays baseball to take care of boise not having a team (cough UH cough) would make it a stronger baseball conference for sure...probably one of the best if teams like New Mexico and SDSU continue to get better
Besides the fact that the MWC would lose its brick and morter in Utah and BYU, football would stay close to the same level
Besides the fact that the MWC would lose its brick and morter in Utah and BYU, football would stay close to the same level
Houston Frog
New Member
People who keep saying that adding Boise would hurt our baseball conference, no it wouldn't. Nothing would change. Adding a team with a terrible baseball program would hurt it, but if you add a team with no baseball team, there is no change.
icemonkee
New Member
QUOTE(Houston Frog @ May 1 2010, 06:58 PM) [snapback]554023[/snapback]
People who keep saying that adding Boise would hurt our baseball conference, no it wouldn't. Nothing would change. Adding a team with a terrible baseball program would hurt it, but if you add a team with no baseball team, there is no change.
True, but in the case of us losing BYU and Utah, adding Fresno and Boise alone means we lose a baseball team
People who keep saying that adding Boise would hurt our baseball conference, no it wouldn't. Nothing would change. Adding a team with a terrible baseball program would hurt it, but if you add a team with no baseball team, there is no change.
True, but in the case of us losing BYU and Utah, adding Fresno and Boise alone means we lose a baseball team
Houston Frog
New Member
QUOTE(icemonkee @ May 1 2010, 07:02 PM) [snapback]554026[/snapback]
True, but in the case of us losing BYU and Utah, adding Fresno and Boise alone means we lose a baseball team
True, and this was probably the wrong thread for me to bring it up in.
I was looking at it from adding a 10th team to the current conference perspective
True, but in the case of us losing BYU and Utah, adding Fresno and Boise alone means we lose a baseball team
True, and this was probably the wrong thread for me to bring it up in.
I was looking at it from adding a 10th team to the current conference perspective
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
I think the MWC -BYU/Utah, +Fresno/Boise is still pretty clearly a stronger conference. I'd say that even with an intact CUSA, but the reality is that the CUSA is likely to lose teams, too. Really, the MWC football quality will be about the same, although the mtn. will probably dissolve without the Utah schools. The league would probably have to rework its TV deal back to a ESPN off night model to maintain revenue.
It's not an ideal scenario for us, but one that is only a small step back from the current situation. The MWC would still be knocking and with a weakened Big East (and possibly Big 12 and ACC) the MWC could join those in that "middle class" niche that appears to be developing (with the SEC, Big 10, and PAC-10 being the "upper class"). The CUSA is likely to still be on the outside looking in and possibly even in a weaker situation.
It's not an ideal scenario for us, but one that is only a small step back from the current situation. The MWC would still be knocking and with a weakened Big East (and possibly Big 12 and ACC) the MWC could join those in that "middle class" niche that appears to be developing (with the SEC, Big 10, and PAC-10 being the "upper class"). The CUSA is likely to still be on the outside looking in and possibly even in a weaker situation.
Kaiser
New Member
QUOTE(Houston Frog @ May 1 2010, 07:58 PM) [snapback]554023[/snapback]
People who keep saying that adding Boise would hurt our baseball conference, no it wouldn't. Nothing would change. Adding a team with a terrible baseball program would hurt it, but if you add a team with no baseball team, there is no change.
I get what you are saying in that Utah and BYU baseball doesnt exactly help our SOS and FSU is a good baseball team, but with fewer schools in conference with baseball programs (by adding BSU) wouldnt that mean we would play the schools that have teams more often. I.E. more games against AFA?
People who keep saying that adding Boise would hurt our baseball conference, no it wouldn't. Nothing would change. Adding a team with a terrible baseball program would hurt it, but if you add a team with no baseball team, there is no change.
I get what you are saying in that Utah and BYU baseball doesnt exactly help our SOS and FSU is a good baseball team, but with fewer schools in conference with baseball programs (by adding BSU) wouldnt that mean we would play the schools that have teams more often. I.E. more games against AFA?
fanatical frog
Full Member
BYU ain't going to the left coast conference. The MWC should add Boise last week and hope to add Texas Tech and Baylor when the B12 implodes.
I'd rather eat dirt and die than go back to CUSA lite.
I'd rather eat dirt and die than go back to CUSA lite.
Kaiser
New Member
QUOTE(tcugdu @ May 1 2010, 09:20 PM) [snapback]554051[/snapback]
No one cares about baseball when it comes to setting up conferences. Conferences are for football (and to some extent men's basketball).
Agreed. But this question was directed towards TCU fans, and alot of us take pride in baseball. So I thought baseball factored into the opinion.
No one cares about baseball when it comes to setting up conferences. Conferences are for football (and to some extent men's basketball).
Agreed. But this question was directed towards TCU fans, and alot of us take pride in baseball. So I thought baseball factored into the opinion.
gdu
Active Member
QUOTE(Frog Barrister @ May 2 2010, 02:23 AM) [snapback]554079[/snapback]
Agreed. But this question was directed towards TCU fans, and alot of us take pride in baseball. So I thought baseball factored into the opinion.
Baseball would really factor in your mind when determining whether we should stay in a revamped MWC or go back to CUSA? Would it have if he had asked this question in November or if our baseball team was 7-30?
Agreed. But this question was directed towards TCU fans, and alot of us take pride in baseball. So I thought baseball factored into the opinion.
Baseball would really factor in your mind when determining whether we should stay in a revamped MWC or go back to CUSA? Would it have if he had asked this question in November or if our baseball team was 7-30?
Limey Frog
Full Member
QUOTE(IanforHeisman @ May 1 2010, 05:53 PM) [snapback]553985[/snapback]
Would you rather go back to CUSA or stay?
Would you rather go back to CUSA or stay?
Cougar/Frog
Active Member
Without BYU/Utah, the conference would be facing a strong decline, even with bringing in Fresno and Boise. BYU is the only team that can bring huge fans to the Carter and has a strong national brand. Utah has developed a really good national brand, as has Boise State, so that would be a wash. Adding two new TV markets is nice, but losing the Utah market (and virtually every single person in the state) would be a huge hit.
I would rather lose Utah, keep BYU, and add Boise.
I would rather lose Utah, keep BYU, and add Boise.
Delmonico
Semi-Omnipotent Being
QUOTE(fanatical frog @ May 1 2010, 08:58 PM) [snapback]554064[/snapback]
BYU ain't going to the left coast conference. The MWC should add Boise last week and hope to add Texas Tech and Baylor when the B12 implodes.
I'd rather eat dirt and die than go back to CUSA lite.
No, but BYU will be on the Big 12's wish list if CU goes to the Pac 10. And the Big 12 ain't imploding. If it came down to MWC vs Big 12 surviving, the Big 12's TV contract and BCS status gives them a big leg up.
BYU ain't going to the left coast conference. The MWC should add Boise last week and hope to add Texas Tech and Baylor when the B12 implodes.
I'd rather eat dirt and die than go back to CUSA lite.
No, but BYU will be on the Big 12's wish list if CU goes to the Pac 10. And the Big 12 ain't imploding. If it came down to MWC vs Big 12 surviving, the Big 12's TV contract and BCS status gives them a big leg up.
fanatical frog
Full Member
QUOTE(RSF @ May 2 2010, 11:00 AM) [snapback]554253[/snapback]
No, but BYU will be on the Big 12's wish list if CU goes to the Pac 10. And the Big 12 ain't imploding. If it came down to MWC vs Big 12 surviving, the Big 12's TV contract and BCS status gives them a big leg up.
depends on who's left in the b12.....if B10 and SEC both go to 16 teams, those teams are going to come from somewhere. The B12's BCS status and tv contract are both up in the air if they lose Texas and four other flagship schools. Really too many variables to say anything is or ain't happening.
No, but BYU will be on the Big 12's wish list if CU goes to the Pac 10. And the Big 12 ain't imploding. If it came down to MWC vs Big 12 surviving, the Big 12's TV contract and BCS status gives them a big leg up.
depends on who's left in the b12.....if B10 and SEC both go to 16 teams, those teams are going to come from somewhere. The B12's BCS status and tv contract are both up in the air if they lose Texas and four other flagship schools. Really too many variables to say anything is or ain't happening.
