CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Reasons Why the MWC is Improving

by stuckinbig10country · 12/28/2009

Advertisement
S
stuckinbig10country
I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for this (especially point 2), but I think that there are 2 main reasons why the MWC has become much better since the 2005 season.



1. The inclusion of TCU beginning in 2005. Aside from the fact that they are a good team, it has made it easier to recruit in Texas for the whole conference. Its much easier to land a kid if you can tell him and his parents that they'll play close to home at least 2 times during his career.



2. The influx of cash from the current TV contract. The facilities around the conference have been upgraded since the mtn/cstv/vs deal came into being. The schools can afford better head and assistant coaches. This has also improved recruiting.



I think there are a couple things that need to improve (the biggest of which is our bowl tie-ins), but the conference will continue to improve.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
S
Schmoe
No doubt the extra money from the MTN deal has helped with money, but it's also tougher to get exposure when a lot of markets won't pick it up and we have this infighting with DirecTV (not to mention the lousy announcers, poor camera work, and overall second-rate feel of the network). I'm happy to see every game on TV, now let's do some major upgrades to the channel, market it a little better, and make it available to the satellite companies.
S
scott715
The major move would be for the Mtn to get on the Dish. They should offer them a better deal than Directv to get them and pass the deal to Directv. The rate could be lower but the revenues would be higher plus the increase exposure should help the channel with their advertising rate. This would make the detail more valuable and lead to higher revenues to the conferense. Maybe the conferece should buy them out or did it on their own in the very beginning.
M
mcgregor
Recruiting's newer complexion change contributes as well.



First, in the past, talent-rich areas got recruited by the major, and local, programs. The first kids left out of the recruiting process were left to give up their career, or go play at a nameless school. Now, technology, combined with schools and recruits being more willing to travel, has enabled schools to learn about more players, and more players to learn about other schools.



Another factor is the realization of many recruits of the value of playing time. Rather than enrolling at Penn State, and maybe getting a chance to play your senior year, you can instead go to Wyoming and start for 3 years. People are starting to realize that 3 years starting anywhere is >>> than starting 1 year at a premier program. You have more time to develop your talent, and you will likely get more exposure.
E
EM_Puma
One of my fears though is the trend we're seeing with high-profile non-BCS teams like BYU and Boise St that can't get any new contracts for home & away games with BCS teams.



I keep throwing up this flag that Holmoe still has not booked one BCS team into LES since he took over. He's finally getting up against a wall where something has to be done. He's been allowed to side-step the issue since he took over and I want to either see results or I want to hear him say that he can't get it done (no reflection on him personally in making such a confession) under current circumstances. My point is that if we can't get any BCS teams to LES, then let's get it out in the open and in the public. That might not help us still, but it isn't going to hurt whatsoever. Stand up and state that no one has the cajones to come to Provo and let the world know.



It will be just as interesting to see what BSU will do with their future schedule. they are in the same boat. Who in their right mind would want to go to play on the smurf-turf if they didn't have to? We're going, but I think it makes sense (based totally on a true football sense and maybe not with scheduling savy) to book home and away with them.
Advertisement
G
Guest
EM_Puma wrote:
One of my fears though is the trend we're seeing with high-profile non-BCS teams like BYU and Boise St that can't get any new contracts for home & away games with BCS teams.



I keep throwing up this flag that Holmoe still has not booked one BCS team into LES since he took over. He's finally getting up against a wall where something has to be done. He's been allowed to side-step the issue since he took over and I want to either see results or I want to hear him say that he can't get it done (no reflection on him personally in making such a confession) under current circumstances. My point is that if we can't get any BCS teams to LES, then let's get it out in the open and in the public. That might not help us still, but it isn't going to hurt whatsoever. Stand up and state that no one has the cajones to come to Provo and let the world know.



It will be just as interesting to see what BSU will do with their future schedule. they are in the same boat. Who in their right mind would want to go to play on the smurf-turf if they didn't have to? We're going, but I think it makes sense (based totally on a true football sense and maybe not with scheduling savy) to book home and away with them.


I have been in a meeting with Tom Holmoe where he said bluntly that BCS teams are balking at the requirement of playing at LES. Even low to middle of the road pack teams are requiring 2 for 1, and top BCS teams flat out refuse to come to LES. He said he's trying to work more neutral site games just for the simple fact that BCS teams will not play here.
S
scott715
I think the BCS has told their teams to not play the top non-BCS teams. Don't give them ammunition if they were to win. they are also told to play the lower teams as long as they beat them for the same argument. Done right and they will have their reason to not include us into the BCS. Why did ASU and UW cancel their games with us? Why did Wyoming get a home and awasy with Texas?



Maybe we will have to do 1 and dones or 2-1 agreements with teams that we can beat just to get the games. Our lower teams should schedule with Washington St. That is a game that they would have a good chance in
G
gmj81
EM_Puma wrote:
One of my fears though is the trend we're seeing with high-profile non-BCS teams like BYU and Boise St that can't get any new contracts for home & away games with BCS teams.



I keep throwing up this flag that Holmoe still has not booked one BCS team into LES since he took over. He's finally getting up against a wall where something has to be done. He's been allowed to side-step the issue since he took over and I want to either see results or I want to hear him say that he can't get it done (no reflection on him personally in making such a confession) under current circumstances. My point is that if we can't get any BCS teams to LES, then let's get it out in the open and in the public. That might not help us still, but it isn't going to hurt whatsoever. Stand up and state that no one has the cajones to come to Provo and let the world know.



It will be just as interesting to see what BSU will do with their future schedule. they are in the same boat. Who in their right mind would want to go to play on the smurf-turf if they didn't have to? We're going, but I think it makes sense (based totally on a true football sense and maybe not with scheduling savy) to book home and away with them.




I read this a couple times over just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding something. But I don't think I am so help understand who booked the following contracts if not Holmoe:



UCLA

UW

Arizona

ASU (he still got a contract even if he let them out of it at the chance to replace them with OU)

BC (I'm actually not sure who's booking this was but I want to say it was Holmoe)

OU (admittedly not a home and home but I think we can all agree that was a big game to land)



I think Holmoe is doing just fine. He may not have the connections of some of the former AD's but I think the predominant reason we can't get better teams on the schedule is that teams have been unwilling to allow the sleeping giant in BYU to awaken. Despite their best efforts however, Bronco and Holmoe have managed to raise the dead.
S
scott715
I don't know the answer but they could have been booked years ago before Holmoe got there.
G
gmj81
I know FSU was a product of the Lavell era but I know for a fact that all the rest except BC (the only one I don't know) were Holmoe's doing.
Advertisement
M
mormonrasta
stuckinbig10country wrote:
I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for this (especially point 2), but I think that there are 2 main reasons why the MWC has become much better since the 2005 season.



1. The inclusion of TCU beginning in 2005. Aside from the fact that they are a good team, it has made it easier to recruit in Texas for the whole conference. Its much easier to land a kid if you can tell him and his parents that they'll play close to home at least 2 times during his career.



2. The influx of cash from the current TV contract. The facilities around the conference have been upgraded since the mtn/cstv/vs deal came into being. The schools can afford better head and assistant coaches. This has also improved recruiting.



I think there are a couple things that need to improve (the biggest of which is our bowl tie-ins), but the conference will continue to improve.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">


Although the bowl tie-ins need to improve. The fact that the conference teams are playing 5 bowl games is huge. A little bit more than a decade ago a nationally ranked Wyoming team couldn't get a sniff at a bowl game. Now, a 6-6 Wyoming team can play in a bowl game. The more bowl games have helped with the depth of all the nonBCS conferences not just the MWC.
F
frdbtr
The fact is; no top tier BCS team wants to come to BYU and get pummeled and lose the chance to win the BCS championship. I hate to say this but the FSU loss probably helped BYU schedule BCS teams since they will look at that and think maybe they would have a chance to win if they came to LES to play. I don't think there is any mandate from BCS conferences to freeze out non bcs teams that can beat them. I think there is a genuine fear of losing if they come here to play. I would be surprised to see the MWC get much scheduling from any pac 10 team after the beating we have put on them as a conference the last few years.
M
Mars
scott715 wrote:
I think the BCS has told their teams to not play the top non-BCS teams. Don't give them ammunition if they were to win.

Then why did Oregon State schedule both TCU and Boise State next season?
S
scott715
It does not mean that teams will not do what they want to do. I am not sure why OSU is scheduling those games. they know that they will not be undefeated so they are high profile games for them and money too.
S
stuckinbig10country
Top 20 programs don't give 2 for 1 and 1 and dones. Top 20 programs try and get 7 home games. BYU is a top 20 program. Therefore, BYU doesn't give 2 for 1 and 1 and dones and should try and schedule 7 home games (or 6 home games and a neutral site game).



The same thing is true for Utah, TCU and Boise St. 20% of the top 20 programs are non-AQ schools, and people need to start recognizing them as such. Big time BCS teams shouldn't be afraid to play them because it will actually improve their SOS. Smaller teams should be happy to get 2 for 1's or 1 and dones from these four schools.



There needs to be a fundamental change in how BYU, Utah, TCU and Boise St view themselves. BYU has already started to put their foot down. I think Utah's game with ND next year should be the last time they do anything like that (if things were really as they should be, ND would be begging Utah to play them, and would come to RES to do it).



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
Advertisement
F
Florwood
mcgregor wrote:
Another factor is the realization of many recruits of the value of playing time. Rather than enrolling at Penn State, and maybe getting a chance to play your senior year, you can instead go to Wyoming and start for 3 years.


One year at Penn State or three years at Wyoming...one year at Penn State or three years at Wyoming...



Man, that's a harsh choice.
S
Schmoe
Mars wrote:
I think the BCS has told their teams to not play the top non-BCS teams. Don't give them ammunition if they were to win.

Then why did Oregon State schedule both TCU and Boise State next season?


Because they don't play by the rules ;)
E
EM_Puma
gmj81 wrote:
One of my fears though is the trend we're seeing with high-profile non-BCS teams like BYU and Boise St that can't get any new contracts for home & away games with BCS teams.



I keep throwing up this flag that Holmoe still has not booked one BCS team into LES since he took over. He's finally getting up against a wall where something has to be done. He's been allowed to side-step the issue since he took over and I want to either see results or I want to hear him say that he can't get it done (no reflection on him personally in making such a confession) under current circumstances. My point is that if we can't get any BCS teams to LES, then let's get it out in the open and in the public. That might not help us still, but it isn't going to hurt whatsoever. Stand up and state that no one has the cajones to come to Provo and let the world know.



It will be just as interesting to see what BSU will do with their future schedule. they are in the same boat. Who in their right mind would want to go to play on the smurf-turf if they didn't have to? We're going, but I think it makes sense (based totally on a true football sense and maybe not with scheduling savy) to book home and away with them.


I read this a couple times over just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding something. But I don't think I am so help understand who booked the following contracts if not Holmoe:



UCLA

UW

Arizona

ASU (he still got a contract even if he let them out of it at the chance to replace them with OU)

BC (I'm actually not sure who's booking this was but I want to say it was Holmoe)

OU (admittedly not a home and home but I think we can all agree that was a big game to land)



I think Holmoe is doing just fine. He may not have the connections of some of the former AD's but I think the predominant reason we can't get better teams on the schedule is that teams have been unwilling to allow the sleeping giant in BYU to awaken. Despite their best efforts however, Bronco and Holmoe have managed to raise the dead.


The only game on your list that Tom Holmoe signed up was OU, and as you note, that was an away game.



Holmoe did not sign UCLA, UW, Arizona, ASU or BC. Each of those games was on our schedule before he took over as AD.



I stand by my statement that Holmoe has not inked one BCS team into the LES since he took over.
E
EM_Puma
Mars wrote:
I think the BCS has told their teams to not play the top non-BCS teams. Don't give them ammunition if they were to win.

Then why did Oregon State schedule both TCU and Boise State next season?


Right following our game with OSU, Mike Riley said there was no game, as of yet with TCU for next year. He did acknowledge that there is talk and as we saw from our experience with the game in Dallas, that is takes a bit to get all parties squared up to play in that game that they want to be an annual game in the new Cowboys stadium. I haven't seen anything this week cementing that deal. Did I miss it?



OSU and BSU are very close logistically and it doesn't surprise me if they always played as each of their fans would have no trouble traveling to one anothers school. The OSU game is a continuation of a contract and the game will be in Cornvallis. According to nationalchamps.com, other than that away game for Boise with OSU, they have no other BCS team currently on their future published schedule.



I wonder if a BCS team were given a choice and they had to pick one, would they rather have to play BYU in LES or BSU in Boise?
E
EM_Puma
stuckinbig10country wrote:
Top 20 programs don't give 2 for 1 and 1 and dones. Top 20 programs try and get 7 home games. BYU is a top 20 program. Therefore, BYU doesn't give 2 for 1 and 1 and dones and should try and schedule 7 home games (or 6 home games and a neutral site game).



The same thing is true for Utah, TCU and Boise St. 20% of the top 20 programs are non-AQ schools, and people need to start recognizing them as such. Big time BCS teams shouldn't be afraid to play them because it will actually improve their SOS. Smaller teams should be happy to get 2 for 1's or 1 and dones from these four schools.



There needs to be a fundamental change in how BYU, Utah, TCU and Boise St view themselves. BYU has already started to put their foot down. I think Utah's game with ND next year should be the last time they do anything like that (if things were really as they should be, ND would be begging Utah to play them, and would come to RES to do it).



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">


Coach Mendenhall was quoted just over a month ago about the inability that appears to exist to get a home and away with any BCS team and while he did say earlier in the season that he felt BYU was to the point where they didn't need to play 2 for 1's, which he stated BYU had turned down offers earlier this season, he was now beginning to see that scenario exist.



The bottom line is that we the BYU will be screwed because we're just not going to see the home lineups we have seen in the past. This is going to be interesting.
Page 1 of 2
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.