Boise withdraws from MWC

[nelsonmuntz]

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/boise-state-beats-deadline-will-leave-mountain-west-160977565.html

 

[jbdphi]

Good news I guess. 2013 seems a long time away though.

 

[noeynox]

Thank Goodness. Wonder if they have figured out what to do with their other sports.

 

[Dann]

is it possible that we could create 2 conf's? i'm starting to warm up to that type of idea i think nelson put out originally vs my big all sports crap.
have a big east and a big west and have a merger of ship fball games. all other sports play there league only type deal.

uconn/ruty/tem/cincy/lville/navy/usf/ucf/memphis/ecu
bsu/sdsu/uh/smu//byu/fresno/unr/unlv/tulsa or nm

-in fball play your division and winner goes to ship game between two leagues for a bcs playoff hope/dream bid
-add the bball onlys to the east and out west add zaga/stmary and a few others.
- that would get us the max contract possible tv wise for both leagues.
- other sports would be set up for the west schools to be happy and they can as a group rise overall as ath depts. in the east the bball schools and good bball/fball schools like lville uconn etc can still play bball at a high level.
-this league is huge all together so it wont hurt at all if any 1 or more teams gets invites elsewhere.
-the team i listed above basically create a huge divide between the top 6 leagues and then the mac and new cusa. its not even close.
-between bsu/byu/uh the west will always have atleast 1 top team in the polls to play vs the east winner.

 

[UCFBfan]

Isn't that what the MWC and C-USA unsuccessfully tried to do a few months back? Not sure why it would work this time with the Big East and basically the remains of the MWC.....I like the thinking though.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Isn't that what the MWC and C-USA unsuccessfully tried to do a few months back? Not sure why it would work this time with the Big East and basically the remains of the MWC.....I like the thinking though.

I think that the MWC and CUSA will announce a merger within 2 years. I believe a big reason they didn't do it this year was because announcing a dissolution of the two leagues and formation of a new one put all the exit fees from the BE bound schools at risk, which will be tens of millions of dollars. The main reason they would dissolve the two leagues is to get a better TV deal, because they are locked into two long-term lousy deals that would get cancelled with a merger, and because it may better position them for an automatic bid once the playoff expands.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I have trouble following Dan's scenario. My proposal was to have Boise and SDSU form a new non-football conference out west while adding two more football only schools to the Big East football conference. We need 1 more school anyway, which will probably come from the west, to get to 14. Why not just go to 16, and create an affiliated but separate hoops league out west, adding Gonzaga and St. Mary's? It will be a far superior choice than the Big West for SDSU and Boise, and will really gut the MWC.

 

[The Funster]

If there will be an affiliated "Big West" I would like to see some crossover for hoops. Say it was to be two 8 team leagues, you could play 2x7 in your league and then 4 games against the other for 18 "conference" games.

 

[businesslawyer]

-this league is huge all together so it wont hurt at all if any 1 or more teams gets invites elsewhere.
-the team i listed above basically create a huge divide between the top 6 leagues and then the mac and new cusa. its not even close.
-.

Substitute "top 5 leagues" for "top 6 leagues" and you may be on to something.

No organization of any type gets stronger when you add members that are below the median strength that exists before their addition. I don't understand why that concept gives so many here so much trouble. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Temple. And we will not be strengthening ourselves by adding schools that we didn't look at adding while we still had Temple and Memphis to go to.

 

[junglehusky]

BL, the answer is simple: Clap Harder and the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. It's like Voltron!

 

[Dann]

Substitute "top 5 leagues" for "top 6 leagues" and you may be on to something.

No organization of any type gets stronger when you add members that are below the median strength that exists before their addition. I don't understand why that concept gives so many here so much trouble. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Temple. And we will not be strengthening ourselves by adding schools that we didn't look at adding while we still had Temple and Memphis to go to.

so when the big east was down to uconn/ruty/cincy/lville/usf your saying we should not have added anyone(maybe bsu?).so lets stay at 5 schools who could never as result fill a fball schedule unless they play each other twice. all this because the teams we can add would be teams upgrading to our level. tcu and wvu left. cuse and pitt left. we only had 5 teams, we needed and still need to do something big just to give a attempt at living. getting all the best potential schools and going for it seems like the best idea. hell we did it last time with uconn/usf...i'm sure you do understand that uconn used to be in trailers correct? we were nothing and someone saw the potential.

i don't get the tough guy act. yea no adding memphis isn't the same as adding tenn. but can we add tenn? no, so we have to add memphis and help build them into something. if uconn was in a conf where we could add tenn then hot dam things like this wouldn't be such a issue. if you dont enjoy all the chat then just leave it alone but u have to be a real stubburn guy to not get that the only chance this league has at a tv contract and living is going big with potential and trying to flip it. it worked once, it potentially could work again. at this point we have to join in and be about it also, its for the best of uconn. if this league doesn't work out then we can go indy in fball and play army/navy/ruty/umass every year for starters. just give it sometime and think big in the long run.

 

[businesslawyer]

so when the big east was down to uconn/ruty/cincy/lville/usf your saying we should not have added anyone(maybe bsu?).so lets stay at 5 schools who could never as result fill a fball schedule unless they play each other twice.

No need to go all Muntz on me and put words in my mouth just to disagree with them. You are way better than that.

Where did I criticize adding SMU, UCF, Houston and Boise? I didn't. We did that to replace teams we lost. So where do you get that I would be o.k. staying at five.

Temple and Memphis weren't needed to stay at 8 and made us weaker. Adding more crap, unless we need to in order to get to 8, will make us weaker. Not stronger. That's all I said

 

[Dann]

No need to go all Muntz on me and put words in my mouth just to disagree with them. You are way better than that.

Where did I criticize adding SMU, UCF, Houston and Boise? I didn't. We did that to replace teams we lost. So where do you get that I would be o.k. staying at five.

Temple and Memphis weren't needed to stay at 8 and made us weaker. Adding more crap, unless we need to in order to get to 8, will make us weaker. Not stronger. That's all I said

so you would rather have a conf of 9 with 1 of those schools being closer to alaska then any other team? and are those 4 schools added fball only or all sports in your eyes?

 

[pj]

Substitute "top 5 leagues" for "top 6 leagues" and you may be on to something.

No organization of any type gets stronger when you add members that are below the median strength that exists before their addition. I don't understand why that concept gives so many here so much trouble. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Temple. And we will not be strengthening ourselves by adding schools that we didn't look at adding while we still had Temple and Memphis to go to.

I think the five that got us to 10, UCF / Houston / SMU / Boise / SDSU, clearly increased the median value of the league, both in terms of football strength (Boise and Houston being in top 10, others with potential), recruiting potential (Texas and Florida), and TV markets (Orlando #19, Houston #10, Dallas #5, San Diego #28)

Temple and Memphis definitely weakened the football, but the calculation is that revenue per team is greater with 12 teams and a conference championship game, and it's all about TV revenue.

Unfortunately there weren't a lot of good choices available for #11 and #12. Philadelphia is the #4 TV market and Memphis the #48 TV market. Not saying Temple brings Philly, but overall these two must have seemed like they add more viewers than other available schools. BYU and Air Force weren't coming, not immediately anyway, Army didn't come, and after those there are slim pickings. Eastern Carolina, Western Michigan, Ohio, those are the kind of choices that are left.

Within this context, we did strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis and Temple, even though they are below the median value. It is the value of getting to 12 teams that makes them valuable.

 

[pj]

BL, if your point is that we shouldn't be adding a bunch of weak small-market western teams, then I think you have a good point. But I don't think you can say that the overall move of getting to 12 weakened the league. It looks like it strengthened the league considerably. We'll see how the TV contract negotiations turn out - without any track record the league won't get top dollar - but it'll certainly be worth more than a northeast regional league.

 

[UConnDan97]

BL, if your point is that we shouldn't be adding a bunch of weak small-market western teams, then I think you have a good point. But I don't think you can say that the overall move of getting to 12 weakened the league. It looks like it strengthened the league considerably. We'll see how the TV contract negotiations turn out - without any track record the league won't get top dollar - but it'll certainly be worth more than a northeast regional league.

This. +1. I don't know the numbers of the new contract, and for that matter, I don't know what the contract would have been if we were just 8 teams. But I have to assume, as I think others should, that the Big East brass consulted a great many people / entities in order to evaluate expanding into tv markets, etc. It is very likely that the feedback that they received on their due diligence was positive, otherwise the moves would not have been made. So, simply put, yes we did get stronger.

 

[UCFBfan]

We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Temple. And we will not be strengthening ourselves by adding schools that we didn't look at adding while we still had Temple and Memphis to go to.

This is a football viewpoint. Those teams were added because of their basketball strength. This is still a hybrid conference in all aspects from football only to everything but football schools. The reason Temple and Memphis were added were to keep the bball schools happy and keep something consistent with the Big East, basketball. Football has the potential to grow and get stronger but the key word is "time". Temple and Memphis can come in and keep the Big East strong in basketball without "time" needed to grow. Will they replace Syracuse and Pitt, no but they are not as much of a drop off as SMU and UCF will be. So I think that Temple and Memphis were basketball adds and sold to the football members as prime TV markets. It's all how you look at it I guess.....

 

[businesslawyer]

I think the five that got us to 10, UCF / Houston / SMU / Boise / SDSU, clearly increased the median value of the league, both in terms of football strength (Boise and Houston being in top 10, others with potential), recruiting potential (Texas and Florida), and TV markets (Orlando #19, Houston #10, Dallas #5, San Diego #28)

Temple and Memphis definitely weakened the football, but the calculation is that revenue per team is greater with 12 teams and a conference championship game, and it's all about TV revenue.

Unfortunately there weren't a lot of good choices available for #11 and #12. Philadelphia is the #4 TV market and Memphis the #48 TV market. Not saying Temple brings Philly, but overall these two must have seemed like they add more viewers than other available schools. BYU and Air Force weren't coming, not immediately anyway, Army didn't come, and after those there are slim pickings. Eastern Carolina, Western Michigan, Ohio, those are the kind of choices that are left.

Within this context, we did strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis and Temple, even though they are below the median value. It is the value of getting to 12 teams that makes them valuable.

This is a great post.

 

[businesslawyer]

BL, if your point is that we shouldn't be adding a bunch of weak small-market western teams, then I think you have a good point. But I don't think you can say that the overall move of getting to 12 weakened the league. It looks like it strengthened the league considerably. We'll see how the TV contract negotiations turn out - without any track record the league won't get top dollar - but it'll certainly be worth more than a northeast regional league.

I don't see how going to 12 helped. but, if they did it consulting with experts and it works, I'll happily say I'm wrong. I just don't see how Temple and Memphis could add to the per team capita.

 

[businesslawyer]

so you would rather have a conf of 9 with 1 of those schools being closer to alaska then any other team? and are those 4 schools added fball only or all sports in your eyes?

so you would rather have a conf of 9 with 1 of those schools being closer to alaska then any other team? and are those 4 schools added fball only or all sports in your eyes?

I thought everything we did made perfect sense, up to adding Temple and Memphis.

 

[CL82]

Substitute "top 5 leagues" for "top 6 leagues" and you may be on to something.

No organization of any type gets stronger when you add members that are below the median strength that exists before their addition. I don't understand why that concept gives so many here so much trouble. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Temple. And we will not be strengthening ourselves by adding schools that we didn't look at adding while we still had Temple and Memphis to go to.

If you are measuring the 'gap' or 'divide' between the Big East and the rest of the field (excluding the five above us, obviously) then their are two points that you have look at 1) where the Big East is, post expansion, and 2) where the rest of the field is, post expansion. By taking the best available teams(and that's a point that can be debated) the Big East maintained or expanded the differential between it and the rest of the field. We are much closer to the ACC than the rest of field is to us, in my opinion. The big 6 distinction is as valid as it was before the raid. The rest of the 'power conferences' are just taking advantage of the moment. By the way, but for some effective posturing by Swofford, with the support of the talking heads at ESPN, this discussion was very close to being the Big 4. That may be a much more honest distinction.

 

[whaler11]

It's funny that dozens of posters here claim they could have run the Big East better than the leadership the last half decade, but now people want to chalk up Temple and Memphis as smart decision and attribute to experts.

Temple is here because they could fill out the football schedules. Memphis was seemingly invited to shut Pitino up.

Everyone likes to kill the Big East on the past, but when they make terrible decisions in the present you don't hear quite so much.

 

[Srqhusky]

Does anyone think Memphis and Temple are on upticks in football I do.

 

[UConnDan97]

It's funny that dozens of posters here claim they could have run the Big East better than the leadership the last half decade, but now people want to chalk up Temple and Memphis as smart decision and attribute to experts.

It would only be funny if they were the same people...

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I thought everything we did made perfect sense, up to adding Temple and Memphis.

Out of curiosity (serious question, not being a wise ass) if we didn't get Temple for Big East Football 2012, what would have happened? Could we have played 6 league games and scheduled another FCS opponent? Are 7 league members below the BCS threshold. I'm not sure of any of these answers.

The way I look at it and this has more or less been said by other Boneyarders but alas:

1) Conference Championship game value
2) Memphis and Temple hoop value, helps off set their football being below median value of current football members.
3) Guess with #2, but keeping the BE Championship in MSG an attractive commodity.

Ultimately, Temple was a necessity and Memphis was a hoops move that made the football league 12 teams (though I suppose we could have waited another couple years for Navy).

It's not ideal at all, but I'm not sure what any of the alternatives were. Maybe ponying up the cash for Boise State to join this year for football?