MWC Expansion Rumors - BCS Autobid

Just read this article about MWC expanding to 12 teams in order to secure a BCS autobid:



http://www.mwcconnection.com/2009/11/11/1127150/mountain-west-conference-to-expand



Apparently there is talk that in order to get an autobid we have to expand. The teams that would be added would be Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada. Don't know how much of that is fact and how much is speculation (I'm wondering if the teams are just speculation, since Nevada doesn't make the most sense in my opinion).



I think this is plausible and probably how things will go down (whether these rumors are true or not). The BCS hates the idea of taking a conference like ours, which is very top heavy with a lot of scum at the bottom. They hate the Big East and would rather drop them than add us, in my opinion. However, I don't think they can get away with dropping them, especially with the publicity brought by BYU, TCU, Utah, and Boise State the last few years. Requiring expansion seems like a good compromise -- the Mountain West adds some teams to make the BCS think it is more competitive (I'm not sure that it would be) and in turn gets the autobid.



I thought Boise State would be enough, but apparently we need Nevada too to raise our level of competitiveness. I would prefer 10 teams max (I hate the idea of a conference champion who doesn't play everyone else in the conference), but if it meant better access to the BCS and ultimately the national title game, then 12 would be fine too.

I don't like it. I don't mean to make another "these are the teams I would pick for conference expansion" thread, but UNR? YUCK! Gimme Tulsa, gimme Houston, gimme Central Mich, heck, gimme Navy (I know, I know...), there's just something about UNR that rubs me the wrong way.

I haven't followed the 'rumors' too well but does their expectation of 12 teams apply to the Big Televan and the Pac-1.5 also? If they do I would sooner sit back and wait for the 'rumor' of Utah and Colorado bolting to the Pac-1.5 and hoping that another of the Big 12's teams goes to the Big Televan and then hoping beyond hope that the Big 12 rounds our their new 12 with BYU and TCU. Here's to HOPING.



Go Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID

UVACoug wrote:
...They hate the Big East and would rather drop them than add us, in my opinion.

Greg Wrubell noted a few months ago when he printed the laws and conditions of admission to the BCS and it detailed that the process would not be expelling a current conference. Unless he copied that info wrong guys, that should end that statement that keeps coming up as it is incorrect.



"They" - is comprised of the Big East as well as the SEC, Big Ten, etc, so I don't know how someone can say "they" hate, when the Big East is a part of "they".



At this point, focus on the MWC and opportunities to join the cartel and not worry about the Big East.

Somehow when the "rumor" is coming from a guy with the nickname "Hacksaw," well it loses some credibility

Why we're talking rumors here, I was surprised in watching my Buckeyes demolish Penn State in College Station that the announcers quoted Joe Pa in saying that he was very much behind the Big Ten adding that twelfth team so the Big Ten could have a championship game.



The announcers said someting about Paterno wanting an eastern team, meaning Pennsylvania or I think he was referring to something even further east to bring that market more into the Big Ten. I have no idea who they would add that would fit that scenario other than one of the Big East teams. I think the long going rumor was though that the Big Ten, if they were to expand, would want Missouri, but I never understood what would ever propel Missouri to wanting to join the Big Ten. Does Missouri have a natural rival anywhere? I guess being in a conference with Iowa and Illinois could be natural rivals, but not any more than Iowa State, KU, KSU, OU or Oklahoma State, so I never understood why they would even desire to leave.



So I don't know, but the bottom line is my hope that the MWC can qualify for the BCS and then who cares about other conference expansion?

EM_Puma wrote:

...They hate the Big East and would rather drop them than add us, in my opinion.

Greg Wrubell noted a few months ago when he printed the laws and conditions of admission to the BCS and it detailed that the process would not be expelling a current conference. Unless he copied that info wrong guys, that should end that statement that keeps coming up as it is incorrect.



"They" - is comprised of the Big East as well as the SEC, Big Ten, etc, so I don't know how someone can say "they" hate, when the Big East is a part of "they".



At this point, focus on the MWC and opportunities to join the cartel and not worry about the Big East.

I don't know if what you say Wrubell said is right. My point was not that they would drop the Big East instead of adding us, but that that is what they would rather do. The "they" is the balance of power in the BCS (meaning a majority, or everyone but the Big East conference).

I have no interest in expansion if it means bringing in the likes of Fresno State and/or Nevada. These programs and their fanbases are the college football equivalent of the mullet. They make Utah fans look classy and Wyoming fans look sober. I'm not in favor of expansion at all beyond Boise State. There's no need to water the conference down with the dregs of the WAC and Conference USA. By adding Boise State we will have cherry picked the only good non-BCS programs in the west (TCU and BSU) not already in the MWC conference. A conference with BYU, Utah, TCU, Boise State and Air Force is absolutely worthy of an auto-bid.

EM_Puma wrote:
Does Missouri have a natural rival anywhere? I guess being in a conference with Iowa and Illinois could be natural rivals, but not any more than Iowa State, KU, KSU, OU or Oklahoma State, so I never understood why they would even desire to leave.

Missouri has three primary rivals:



Kansas (from the Bleeding Kansas border war of the 1850s)

Nebraska

Illinois



I think Missouri would be a decent fit in the Big Ten. Pitt wouldn't be so bad either, because it would give State Penn a long-time rival back.



As for the MWC, I'm with those that think that Houston (or Tulsa) are better options than Nevada. I believe that TCU has a limit on the amount of west coast games it can play, so adding Houston should keep TCU satisfied. Plus Houston is located in a major city in a recruiting hotbed and has a decent history in both football and basketball.

They were discussing this a little on 1320 KFAN on my way into work today. A couple of points were brought up that I happened to agree with.



1) Houston over Nevada. Nevada has no history, are barely competitive in the WAC and don't bring much to the table. Houston, while a little bit of the flavor-of-the-month with the season we are having, would at least continue to open up Texas for recruiting. The hosts were trying to argue that Houston wasn't a big-time program in Texas, but TCU's a little brother, too, and seem to be doing fine.



2) I didn't hear the way the divisions would be aligned, but you'd have to be careful to keep some parity in there. It would suck to have a situation where TCU blasts through their weak division and are in the championship game every year when BYU, Boise and Utah are beating each other up all season. You'd also have to be careful about putting a team from a weak division with a sub-par record in the championship game and having them get lucky one week and end up in the BCS.



I agree that the conference would be better off with BSU, but I don't think adding 2 more perennial bottom dwellers adds any credibility besides the possibility of a championship game.

I immediately discredit this source when he begins to talk about a TV deal with ESPN in the works. I doubt ESPN is going to be buying out CBS's 12 year or so contract, much less all the ancillary agreements they would need to cut through to become the media partner for an expanded Mountain West.



Expansion---coming soon.

New TV deal----not until this one expires

No Red Cougars in the MWC!!!! :evil:

hawkwing wrote:
No Red Cougars in the MWC!!!! :evil:

:D HAHA, Aw that was a good laugh... It's bad enough when I see red BYU hats that are from BYU Hawaii.

I agree with everyone about not wanting Nevada or Fresno State. I would prefer Boise State only, and then only if it is necessary to get a BCS autobid. But the guy on the radio who spoke about the rumors made it sound like it was a done deal and the teams were the three I mentioned in the original post. Does anyone think there is any credibility to this?



Hopefully it is just what someone overheard, and the exact details about expansion can still be worked out. I would much prefer adding Houston or Tulsa over Nevada and would prefer ten teams (or better yet, nine if we could somehow loose a bottom dweller like Wyoming) to twelve.

snoscythe wrote:
I immediately discredit this source when he begins to talk about a TV deal with ESPN in the works. I doubt ESPN is going to be buying out CBS's 12 year or so contract, much less all the ancillary agreements they would need to cut through to become the media partner for an expanded Mountain West.



Expansion---coming soon.

New TV deal----not until this one expires

I wouldn't be surprised if the conference could opt out of their current tv deal if the membership changed.

BSU, UH, and Tulsa would be my picks.

snoscythe wrote:
I immediately discredit this source when he begins to talk about a TV deal with ESPN in the works. I doubt ESPN is going to be buying out CBS's 12 year or so contract, much less all the ancillary agreements they would need to cut through to become the media partner for an expanded Mountain West.



Expansion---coming soon.

New TV deal----not until this one expires

One interesting thought is that Gameday will be in a third MWC town in four weeks. :bug:



Also, I like BSU, Houston, and Fresno St (very rich recruiting market).

Add BSU and Houston. Two top 25 teams. the third team is tricky. Tulsa is the best of the lot and nice market. SMU maybe in 5 years. Fresno if there is no one else. Navy is nice except the distance. Notre Dame but they won't give up their tv contract. Maybe the confernce should sell the spot to the highest bidder.

UVACoug wrote:

UVACoug wrote:
...They hate the Big East and would rather drop them than add us, in my opinion.

Greg Wrubell noted a few months ago when he printed the laws and conditions of admission to the BCS and it detailed that the process would not be expelling a current conference. Unless he copied that info wrong guys, that should end that statement that keeps coming up as it is incorrect.



"They" - is comprised of the Big East as well as the SEC, Big Ten, etc, so I don't know how someone can say "they" hate, when the Big East is a part of "they".



At this point, focus on the MWC and opportunities to join the cartel and not worry about the Big East.

I don't know if what you say Wrubell said is right. My point was not that they would drop the Big East instead of adding us, but that that is what they would rather do. The "they" is the balance of power in the BCS (meaning a majority, or everyone but the Big East conference).

Besides the media, I'd love someone to show me where one of the conference commissioners stated publically that "they" wanted to drop the Big East. Up until 2 or so years ago the commissioner of the BCS was the Big East commissioner.



It is true that the media and fans have said as much, but when individuals claim that the commissioners from the other BCS conferences have stated that they would like to drop the Big East, then we would be talking something, but I haven't seen anything and I really don't expect to from them and they sadly are the ones that actually vote on such items.



As far as what Wrubell said, he was copying the text from either the website or some other document and it did say that the current bylaws did not currently include the possibility of dropping a current BCS conference.