CsquaredCC
Well-Known Member
No question that the strength of that conference would be in BYU and BSU, but that is no different than most conferences whose premier programs are a cut above the rest.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
MWC Expands - End of the WAC?
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
No question that the strength of that conference would be in BYU and BSU, but that is no different than most conferences whose premier programs are a cut above the rest.
With the BCS change and the WAC defections, I would be surprised if Boise CC did not reverse course and stay in the MWC. Slightly easier schedule (limiting potential losses), a home for their other athletic programs that were about to be orphaned with the WAC implosion, and lower expenses on cross country football travel for conference games. It's almost an open and shut decision for them to stay/go back to the MWC.
Keep dreaming lamb lover. The Big East sucks balls, but they have a whole lot of something that the MWC doesn't and that is $$$. Even if they are a ****** football league they have enormous television draw in the major east coast markets with bball, and the MWC simply can't compete. Plus, read the article, San Diego State has already formally withdrawn from the MWC. They are gone, and so is Boise.
Here's what it's more likely to be. 12 teams with no BYU or UTEP. You have to have Boise State in the eastern half for competitive balance. Put them with the California schools and it would be ridiculously weighted.
I agree that it would be a strong 2nd tier western conference. Much more impressive for basketball than football.
CsquaredCC
Well-Known Member
Agreed that BYU is a total longshot. I could see UTEP being added with another Texas school to get to 12, if Boise and SDSU stay with thier moves to the Big East.
On that front, it looks like things are coming to a head. Boise State and SDSU have until June 30 to make up their minds before the full Big East exit fee comes due ($10 MM). With the WAC no longer a viable option, things are looking pretty bleak for Boise State's oly sports. So much so that SDSU is now trying to convince the Big West to bring Boise State's oly sports into the conference. The problem is the Big West has said no and doesn't appear willing to negotiate unless Boise State agrees to pay for members schools' travel expenses to Idaho. Apparently new oly only member Hawaii is also working to block the move. Not a good situation for the Broncos. When SDSU is helping to negotiate on your behalf, I would say things are hitting the desperation stage: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/14/sdsu-helping-boise-state-find-league-solution/
CsquaredCC
Well-Known Member
Tulsa would be the likely choice I think if SDSU and Boise stay with the Big East. Houston has a full invite to the Big East for all its sports. I don't think their is any way the MWC could pry them away.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Houston is sorta like Boise in that they have a Big East invite.
you just claimed you were in the same tier as the Big East, so it should be a lateral move for them.
CsquaredCC
Well-Known Member
With Boise State and SDSU, yes I absolutely think the MWC would be in line with the Big East. Without those two schools, I would not make that argument.
Listened to an Idaho-based radio show yesterday and Vandal fans are actually pushing for an independent FBS bid rather than stoop down to the Big Sky. I honestly cannot see this ending well for them.
I understand the desire to not take a step "backward" into FCS, but Idaho could really make it a step forward by being a dominant program at that level. Of course Montana and App State will still probably kick their butts around on a regular basis.
Tractor
Club Member
I've never understood this rational, even though I've probably read it about 3,000 times on this site from Mtn Buff. I believe it's, D2 = easier competition => winning => higher attendance at games => $$$$$$
I have no idea what the current top 5 FCS schools are, much less the top 25. It's not going to make them known nationwide to play in a league that's on TV for maybe 2 games a year. So they'll be making less money from their TV deal.
If they still aren't getting any exposure, they aren't going to get any more applications from people watching them make some miraculous upset or run through the NCAA tournament. If they aren't getting any more applications, they aren't making any more $$$.
If they are in FCS, they're playing a bunch of other schools nobody has ever heard of before (because they're never on TV). So they'll have to lower the ticket prices for games because the level of competition is down. They're again making less $$$$ even if the exact same amount of people show up to watch the games.
Let's say a school is averaging 20k in attendance for their years in Div 1. When they make the switch, I actually think there will be an initial DECREASE in season ticket sales, as well as individual game day sales because the school is now playing a bunch of teams nobody's ever heard of before. People that were just football fans, and wanted to see the Boise State's on the schedule come so they could see guys that might get drafted high play are no longer interested in going to the games. So they'd better start winning QUICK in order to have this massive jolt in attendance that must happen in order for them to make more $$$. And that massive jolt will have to be well above they're original number in order to make up for lost $$$ in lower ticket values as well as lower TV revenues.
Also, is the plan to get strong and then move back to Div 1?
Mtn Buff, I need another post giving me CSU's optimal plan of action!!! Lol
Outside of their little region does anyone know who CSU or Idaho is? At best they get a listing in the scores section of the Sunday paper. Being FBS level isn't getting them any attention. The MWC isn't on nationwide TV as a league more than twice a year, CSU never. Same for Idaho.
The teams they are playing, except for a couple of bodybag games a year, are all teams like they are. Nobody cares about them, nobody watches them. It isn't getting them publicity or attention at any higher level than if they were FCS.
I don't know what Idaho's ticket prices are. I do know that the average non-student ticket to a CSU home game sells for a little less than half the average non-student ticket for a game in Boulder. They aren't exactly raking in the bucks because they are supposively a FBS team. Even at these prices CSU averages less than 1/2 the home attendance that CU does. Some simple logic means that they are generating about 1/4 the ticket revenue per game that CU does. Hardly a big time revenue producer.
You talk about massive jolts in attendance for incoming teams. Are you talking about the massive jolt CSU got when they had a top 10 Cal team come in and still had under 30,000 people show up. And that was when CSU was still going to bowl games.
Certainly they will lose some fans when they make the drop in divisions. Some of those who hold the fantasy that they are a big-time school will get mad and drop off. If they lose 25% that means going from 20,000 which is at the bottom of FBS to 15,000 which is very competitive at the FCS level. The cost of running the program will go significantly down and they will still have a budget that lets them be competitive. Get back to winning games and having some excitement in the stadium and they will gain fans back. D2 CSU-Pueblo actually had more fans in attendance their last couple games than CSU-Ft. Collins did last year because they were winning, it was fun to be there.
Unless they want to continue to bleed money as they are getting killed every year on the field schools like CSU and Idaho aren't going to have a choice but to look at where they play. Neither one is getting an invitation to a major conference. A new stadium won't change that, a magical big-money donor won't change that, none of their other dreams will change that. $1.5-$2.5 million a year in conference media revenue isn't going to make it when other schools are getting more than that per game.
You can't say forever because nobody knows what the long-term holds but short of a complete change in the college football environment schools like CSU and Idaho are deluding themselves if they think that they can play with the big boys. They are wasting their time and money trying to perpetuate a fantasy that has long passed.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
For the mid-majors a big advantage to downgrading would also be playing teams that are true regional rivals:
When Idaho was in the SunBelt they were playing teams like Louisiana-Lafayette, Florida Atlantic, and Middle Tennessee State. Despite the fact that these were all D-I FBS schools, did it help their attendance?
Or would playing Portland State, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, and Sacramento State be a better "peer group" that would engage fans and alumni?
When Idaho was in the SunBelt they were playing teams like Louisiana-Lafayette, Florida Atlantic, and Middle Tennessee State. Despite the fact that these were all D-I FBS schools, did it help their attendance?
Or would playing Portland State, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, and Sacramento State be a better "peer group" that would engage fans and alumni?