Fanblogs.com: MWC Expansion - Wild Speculation upgraded to Rumors.
U.of S.C.1978
· 1 year ago
I hope so, also. I am in favor of parity, I am impressed by Boise, I think every MWC program would build and toughen, and become more nationally competitive. Oh, by the way, FIRST!
Cougar_Fan
· 1 year ago
They need to add Boise! Wait a few more years and then add two more among Fresno, Nevada, Tulsa, SMU, or Houston. It would definitely boost the MWC and make the Big East and ACC look even worse! Of course the ACC's probably gonna come around, but the Big East? I doubt it!
Diggs_the_Mountie
· 1 year ago
Amazing analysis considering how the last few years have played out....You and Ben should get your own show together , you could call it: "The MWC, Living out a Dream".
Cougar_Fan
· 1 year ago
Well Diggs does it bother you that people are talking more about the MWC more than the Big East nowadays? But just to remind you this is a blog, people come here to discuss college football, if you wanna post something about the Big East go for it, although I don't know that there's much to write about, nor will there be for sometime, the MWC is rising and the Big East is sinking, that's just the way it is.
Ben Prather
· 1 year ago
While I agree the MWC is rising and the Big East is down this year I am not sure the trend is set for the Big East.
The Big East is looking like a PAC 10 like one hit wonder. If West Virginia is down no one is left to pick up the slack.
Zac
· 5 months ago
I disagree. I can remember when a losing season was down for the Mountaineers. Now, they're coming off a 9-4 season (includes bowl win) and they're considered to be down. That just amazes me. But, that's OK, because I'm confident they'll win the Big East this year. They have the right personnel; they just have to consistently execute.
Let's not forget last season, when the Big East was "down," they put 6 out of 8 teams in bowl games and won 4. Not bad for being down. Furthermore, I think Pitt will have another decent season, maybe a win off from last year, but at least better than the previous four. I know Cinci will take a step back defensively, but they'll still be strong offensively. Rutgers is a question mark. S FL should be WVU's biggest challenge, given they boast a 4 year starter at QB. But, don't give up on UConn, not just yet. Kragthorpe needs a little more time with Louisville; Syracuse needs the right HC (How many times have we heard that with other teams, like Auburn, A&M, & TN, just to name a few?).
I think the Big East offers plenty. Like yourself, I wish they offered a little more. Like this thing with the MWC conference, in due time.
Zac
· 5 months ago
"...if you wanna post something about the Big East go for it..."
Well, Coug's Fan, I fully agree. So, I did, right here on Fanblogs. Why? Because , there was plenty to write about. To my surprise, my article attracted 50 comments that were not my own. Not bad for a 1st try.
Ben, here, on the other hand, is a journalist who's been putting up one article after another in an attempt to sell the MWC. AND, rightfully so. Yet on this thread, including this comment, he got all of what, 23 comments that were not his own? Not what I'd consider a great deal of interest, by comparison.
Like the Big East, the MWC is a decent conference with talented, competitive teams, which gets no respect. Unlike the Big East, it's not among the Big-6, or as it might be if they were, the Big-7.
Now, I'm fully aware that you knew all this; that I'm preaching to the choir. What you didn't know, apparently, is that I agree with you and Ben. The MWC not having an automatic bid is a travesty, let alone an injustice. If it takes a thousand articles to get that message across, I'm with you. But don't try to use the Big East as a stepping stone or an excuse. Don't expect the Big East to nobly step outta the way and just give you their spot in the BCS either in protest or for the honor of it. The Big East got there because they earned it. Just because the BCS, for what ever reason, has made it tougher to breach that elite group called the "Big-6" is no fault of the Big East. For the time being, it's just the way it is.
As for whether or not the Big East is "down" or "sinking", and the MWC is on the rise, forget it; that weak argument is not gonna fly. Conferences rise and fall all the time. In the past 6 years each of the "Big Six" had less than average seasons (The Big Televen especially comes to mind.); not to mention, every year except for the end of last season and currently, many fans have also ragged on the ACC. Well, that's all a part of the ebb and flow of the game and its landscape. I would think you'd be used to that by now.
Like it or not, for the time being, the MWC is where it is. But, I'm here to tell ya, the Big East is here to stay. Despite the scrutiny, despite criticism year after year, it's still here. It'll take a lot more than the expansion of MWC or even its getting a guaranteed BCS bid to change that. In fact, ya wanna prove your point, get the MWC AD's & Prez's together and challenge the Big East from top to bottom. But just to warn ya, unless that's done over a period of years, statistically speaking, the outcome of a single season won't prove a thing.
So, you up for creating a couple of new rivalries? Which of the Big East's teams does BYU want the most? I'm listening...
Ben Prather
· 1 year ago
We need to add Boise State, Tulsa and Fresno State as soon as possible, in order of BCS credentials. Boise already had an out plan for the WAC I am sure. They could be in by next year if invited.
Fresno State is a lot more coy about the Idea. They might require a years notice to the WAC. I am not sure Tulsa has really examined the idea. If they go undefeated and don't get a BCS bid that might be the kicker, especially if a one loss MWC team gets in.
Boise in 2009, Fresno State and Tulsa in 2010. That is my expansion plan, faster if possible.
This has nothing to do with the ACC and Big East. The Big East has nothing to do with it. They do not have a contract with a BCS bowl. Their bid is independent of ours.
It does not matter how bad they look, as long as we look stronger. Utah, TCU, BYU, Boise State, Fresno State and Tulsa could all end up ranked in the BCS top 25 this year. Fresno State would have to beat Boise State and they all need to win. TCU can survive a loss to Utah, and BYU also if the loss to Utah is close, or Utah trounces TCU. It is more likely that 4 of these teams will end up in the top 25.
If we expand 2008 would be used to determine BCS AQ eligibility using 3 top 25 teams for 2009 and 4 for 2010-2012, better then any conference other than the SEC and Big 12. The highest ranked team, likely between 10 and 5, would be significantly higher than the highest ranked team the ACC or Big East can muster. A loss by USC would be detrimental to the PAC 10's case as well.
The fact that we are excited because our conference has a team in the top 10 while our second place team lost by 25 to an out of conference foe indicates that our conference has a way to go yet. That said, look at MWC results from 7-8 years ago and see how meager they look compared to current expectations.
Clemson_Joe
· 1 year ago
Fresno has no business being in the top 25 this year (I'd put them somewhere around 50), and I'm not entirely convinced that Tulsa (at this point, Rice is the only team on their entire schedule with a winning record) does either. I won't argue that TCU, BYU, or Utah don't deserve to be, because they do, but Fresno and Tulsa wouldn't do well against any of the real top 25 teams in the country. Fresno would greatly benefit from some stiffer competition on a more regular basis and I think you would see 4 perennially strong teams, but I'm not so sure how Tulsa's program would hold up over time. Just out of curiosity, how do you think TCU would hold up if they happened to lose Gary Patterson?
Ben Prather
· 1 year ago
Fresno needs stiffer competition on a more regular basis???
Fresno plays one of the toughest OOC schedules in the nation. They lost a close one to Wisconsin and a close one to last years BCS Cinderella. The top 25 ranking is also contingent on them beating Boise State.
I think you would have 6 teams that consistently battled for the conference title, it would be weighted to the western division. Tulsa and TCU would battle for the shot at the winner of the Utah, BYU, Boise State, Fresno State winner.
The winner of the championship game would average around #10 in the BCS standings, with 3 teams typically ending in the top 25. 7 or 8 of the 12 teams would usually be bowl eligible.
Tulsa has been solid and would likely stay where they have been for the last 5 years. They consistently rank between the top tier MWC teams and the middle tier teams. This would leave them #5 or #6 in the expanded MWC.
TCU has spent good resources on infrastructure. This is how the top MWC and WAC teams have been able to succeed with a limited budget, spending more on capital and less on coaching personnel. Head Coach at TCU is an excellent position and should not be hard to fill with a qualified up and coming coach.
Clemson_Joe
· 1 year ago
Fresno needs stiffer competition on a more regular basis???
Yes. They play a semi difficult OOC schedule to make up for the fact that the ONLY competitive team that they play in conference is Boise State. The rest of their schedule is a joke. If they were in the MWC, they would have "stiffer competition on a more regular basis."
Tommy_Trojan
· 1 year ago
Clemson_Joe:
Fresno State has around a #35 ranking perennially. They are the #2 team in the WAC conference hands down. They normally would probably play the toughest OOC shedule in the country - just about every year. What holds down their SOS is playing in the WAC. Now, in some years they may be around 50th, but they have had a few years recently when they where Top 25. They have lost many games to top teams by only a few points. And, they have probably pulled more "upsets" than any other mid-major school. Traditionally, Fresno State pounds the rock. They can pass the ball also, but when the running game is going, they can be extremely hard to beat. Another thing they do well is to win Bowl games. They have an amazing ability to beat better teams in the bowl games. They are a solid football program and probably getting better.
Clemson_Joe
· 1 year ago
I am well aware of all of this. However, this year, Fresno would rank around 50th. Being 2nd in the WAC isn't anything special really. That only means that they are better than Hawai'i, Idaho, Louisiana Tech, Nevada, New Mexico State, San Jose State, and Utah State. A little less than half of the teams in the country could claim that as well. Not to mention, even though it's not really their fault, that OOC schedule this year isn't very good.
Tyler_Tech
· 1 year ago
second and last.......new topic!!!
Sid Miser
· 1 year ago
BYU and Utah should go to the PAC 10 and the MWC should replace them with Boise State and Tulsa.
Desertkid
· 1 year ago
It will never happen because BYU won't play on Sunday!
Keller
· 1 year ago
Boise going undefeated, Tulsa being in the top 25, and Fresno's baseball and softball program would all help the mwc
RatDog
· 1 year ago
Tulsa? Come one. Who cares about Tulsa. Where is Tulsa now.
Joe_Utah
· 5 months ago
Expand only if it makes the conference better (competitive and financially). If you do expand, this makes the most sense.
MWC EAST DIVISION TCU Houston (or Tulsa) Airforce New Mexico Colorado State Wyoming
MWC WEST DIVISION Utah BYU Boise St Fresno (or Hawaii) ULVN San Diego
CHAMPIONSHIP GAME
Play the Conference Championship game in Vegas, Pheonix, or Dallas/Ft Worth. If possible, let the highest ranked division winner pick the game location…
The two division champs would play in the championship game... with ONE exception (call it the "we don't suck like the Big-12" rule). It would read something such as… "If a second place EAST or WEST Division team is ranked more than 15 spots ahead of the opposing Division winner in the Top 25 polls (this would be a compiled average of both the Coaches and AP polls), than that second place Division team will replace the lower-ranked Division winner in the Championship game.”
ALIGNMENT
Geographically speaking, the divisions are perfect.
In the EAST, take Houston over Tulsa. First, it gives the MWC a second school in Texas. Second, it adds to the MWC TV footprint. However, Houston does compete with Texas (and to a much smaller degree Texas A&M) for area fans.
In the WEST, add Fresno over Hawaii. Do this for several reasons. First, you add a second California school. Plus, travel is better.
What is really great about this conference is that it includes TWO schools from California and TWO from Texas. It includes ONE military academy. And it includes TWO religious institutions of which ONE, BYU, garners a large following in the Western US.
CONFERENCE EXCELLENCE
Add several poison pill to any expanded conference contract, and make each school sign the new conference agreement. This agreement would include the following provisions:
FIRST PROVISION--ATTENDANCE (The Wyoming Rule) (1) If a member team cannot maintain an average home attendance of 25,000+ fans for the years 2011-2015, or (2) If a member team cannot maintain an average home attendance of 30,000+ fans for the years 2016-2020, or (3) If a team connot maintain an average home attendance of 35,000+ fans for the years 2021-2025, or (4) If a member team cannot maintain an average home attendance of 40,000+ fans for the years 2026 and beyond, THEN... (see PENALTY ONE)
SECOND PROVISION--SUCCESS (The SDSU Rule) If a member school does not achieve a .25% winning record over any five year span (FCS schools may not be included in the win category. Only two non-AQ schools may be included yearly in these numbers), THEN…… (see PENALTY ONE)
THIRD PROVISION—FRAUD (The UNLV Rule) IF A MEMBER institution if found guilty commiting a grevious act of academic or financial fraud (something the seriously jepordizes the integrity of the conference as a whole), THEN…… (see PENALTY ONE)
PENALTY ONE—ATTENDANCE, WINNING, and FRAUD If a team fails to meet PROVISIONS ONE or TWO, or if a member school is found guilty for fraud (PROVISION THREE), then the member school must agree to gracefully withdraw from the conference if the following actions occur: (1) IF an FBS school meeting both the ATTENDANCE and SUCCESS requirement in that team’s DIVISION footprint requests admission into the conference, and (2) At least EIGHT of the twelve conference teams vote on for a "team re-alignment" during their annual meeting. NOTE: If a member team fails to gracefully withdraw from the conference as a result of a "team re-alignment" vote, then this team will be subject to the financial penalties described in PROVISION A.
FOURTH PROVISION—LEAVING THE CONFERENCE (The Utah/BYU/TCU rule) If a member school leaves the conference to either (1) go independent or (2) join another conference without first receiving a two-thirds approval from other member schools, then the member school leaving the conference will pay all remaining conference members damages as described in PENALTY A.
PENALTY A—DAMAGES If a team inflicts harm to the league as decribed in any PROVISION above, the member school is subject to pay the following damages: (1) The member school must pay each conference member 2 million dollars per year (this figure will be adjusted yearly for inflation using 2010 as the base year) payable to each Conference Member School. (2) Damages must be paid every year for a period of 10 years.
I think these rules are critical to ensure that the PAC-10 doesn’t pilpher from the conference when they finally get it together. And this also puts certain schools on notice that it is a privilidge, not a right, to be in the conference.
Joe_Utah
· 5 months ago
After further consideration... my fist three offers during expansion would be to USC, Cal, and Oregon. Would this conference be better than the current PAC-10? And how would the PAC-10 fill their holes?
MWC WEST DIVISION USC CAL SDSU UNLV OREGON NEW MEXICO
MWC EAST DIVISION UTAH BYU TCU CSU AFA Wyoming
If they declined, I would then offer to BSU, Fresno, and Houston.
Clemson_Joe
· 5 months ago
If you're just going to cherry pick the current 3 most powerful programs in the Pac-10, why not also cherry pick Oklahoma and Texas for the MWC East? Come on now, let's be realistic.
Your first plan was rather good, but let's not go overboard.
Ben Prather
· 5 months ago
Haven't you figured out yet that us MWC fans tend to get a bit overboard at times?
You are right though, Texas and Oklahoma would be good additions for the MWC.
Zac
· 5 months ago
True, but where would they get the money to lure those two into the MWC? That would be like the Big East trying to lure MI & OSU from the Big Televen. More realistic or not, it ain't hapn'n
Joe_Utah
· 5 months ago
Actually, after posting "Over-the-Top" comment, I did start thinking that Texas would be a much better fit (than Oregon).
1Tomcat
· 5 months ago
Dont think anybody is gonna leave a {BCS} conference for a non-BCS conference-the wild expansion idea sounds cool, but the MWC will have to include teams from WAC,C-USA or Sun Belt Bois St would be a positive move and Pac-10 could take a couple from the WAC-like Fresno St and SDSU the remaining WAC teams could join -C-USA or SunBelt-La Tech belongs in Sunbelt really UTEP would be a great addition to the MWC a large city & stadium-good attendance and a fit geographically Houston, Rice & Tulane are better suited to the C-USA instead of MWC SMU would be a good MWC addition-located in a large Metro Area would compete more with TCU for recruits That would free up Texas State for C-USA
Joe_Utah
· 5 months ago
That's why I added the FIRST and SECOND provisions to the conference agreement. I am not convinced that Wyoming is headed in the same direction as other MWC schools. Same with NM, UNLV, and SDSU... to a smaller extent. So come 2015, let's say UTEP or Tulsa petitions for admission. And let's assume that one of these schools has become a mini-powerhouse in C-USA. If they better meet the standards of the conference, then the conference should have an out that allows them to replace a struggling school... Bet let's have those teams prove it on the field first.
Joe_Utah
· 5 months ago
The Texas, USC, CAl comments are made somewhat in Jest folks. But with that said, the MWC will have a recruiting benefit that no other conference will have once they add another TX and CA school. We already see this benefit in the conference having only one team from each of these states.
Assuming that the MWC really does expand in 2010(ish) with Boise State, Fresno, and Houston (where there is smoke there must be...), I see Conference USA replacing Houston possibly with LA Tech. And the WAC will simply replace BSU, Fresno, and possibly LA Tech with several FCS schools that are about ready to make the jump (Montana, Sacramento State, etc.).
Remember, the MWC won't announce any moves until the BCS confirms the requirements for AQ status. Last time around, the BCS said that a team needed to be in the conference for at least one of the four evaluation years if the conference wanted to include that team in there evaluation (call this the Big-East/Louiseville rule).
If he MWC gets the BCS to commit to this being a requirement for this next evaluation period (2008-2011), and if the requirements remain the same as they were for the last go-around, then the MWC will wait until summer of 2010 to announce expansion. This give BSU and Fresno time for the required "one-year-notice" year in the WAC. And it allows them to join the MWC for the 2011 season.
The problem is the BCS hasn't provided the AQ requirements yet for this evaluation period. Just to keep the MWC out, they would probably remove the Louiseville rule. It's a moving target that seems to change with each evaluation period... anything to keep the 5 non-AQ conferences out.
All Comments
The Big East is looking like a PAC 10 like one hit wonder. If West Virginia is down no one is left to pick up the slack.
Let's not forget last season, when the Big East was "down," they put 6 out of 8 teams in bowl games and won 4. Not bad for being down. Furthermore, I think Pitt will have another decent season, maybe a win off from last year, but at least better than the previous four. I know Cinci will take a step back defensively, but they'll still be strong offensively. Rutgers is a question mark. S FL should be WVU's biggest challenge, given they boast a 4 year starter at QB. But, don't give up on UConn, not just yet. Kragthorpe needs a little more time with Louisville; Syracuse needs the right HC (How many times have we heard that with other teams, like Auburn, A&M, & TN, just to name a few?).
I think the Big East offers plenty. Like yourself, I wish they offered a little more. Like this thing with the MWC conference, in due time.
Well, Coug's Fan, I fully agree. So, I did, right here on Fanblogs. Why? Because , there was plenty to write about. To my surprise, my article attracted 50 comments that were not my own. Not bad for a 1st try.
Ben, here, on the other hand, is a journalist who's been putting up one article after another in an attempt to sell the MWC. AND, rightfully so. Yet on this thread, including this comment, he got all of what, 23 comments that were not his own? Not what I'd consider a great deal of interest, by comparison.
Like the Big East, the MWC is a decent conference with talented, competitive teams, which gets no respect. Unlike the Big East, it's not among the Big-6, or as it might be if they were, the Big-7.
Now, I'm fully aware that you knew all this; that I'm preaching to the choir. What you didn't know, apparently, is that I agree with you and Ben. The MWC not having an automatic bid is a travesty, let alone an injustice. If it takes a thousand articles to get that message across, I'm with you. But don't try to use the Big East as a stepping stone or an excuse. Don't expect the Big East to nobly step outta the way and just give you their spot in the BCS either in protest or for the honor of it. The Big East got there because they earned it. Just because the BCS, for what ever reason, has made it tougher to breach that elite group called the "Big-6" is no fault of the Big East. For the time being, it's just the way it is.
As for whether or not the Big East is "down" or "sinking", and the MWC is on the rise, forget it; that weak argument is not gonna fly. Conferences rise and fall all the time. In the past 6 years each of the "Big Six" had less than average seasons (The Big Televen especially comes to mind.); not to mention, every year except for the end of last season and currently, many fans have also ragged on the ACC. Well, that's all a part of the ebb and flow of the game and its landscape. I would think you'd be used to that by now.
Like it or not, for the time being, the MWC is where it is. But, I'm here to tell ya, the Big East is here to stay. Despite the scrutiny, despite criticism year after year, it's still here. It'll take a lot more than the expansion of MWC or even its getting a guaranteed BCS bid to change that. In fact, ya wanna prove your point, get the MWC AD's & Prez's together and challenge the Big East from top to bottom. But just to warn ya, unless that's done over a period of years, statistically speaking, the outcome of a single season won't prove a thing.
So, you up for creating a couple of new rivalries? Which of the Big East's teams does BYU want the most? I'm listening...
Fresno State is a lot more coy about the Idea. They might require a years notice to the WAC. I am not sure Tulsa has really examined the idea. If they go undefeated and don't get a BCS bid that might be the kicker, especially if a one loss MWC team gets in.
Boise in 2009, Fresno State and Tulsa in 2010. That is my expansion plan, faster if possible.
This has nothing to do with the ACC and Big East. The Big East has nothing to do with it. They do not have a contract with a BCS bowl. Their bid is independent of ours.
It does not matter how bad they look, as long as we look stronger. Utah, TCU, BYU, Boise State, Fresno State and Tulsa could all end up ranked in the BCS top 25 this year. Fresno State would have to beat Boise State and they all need to win. TCU can survive a loss to Utah, and BYU also if the loss to Utah is close, or Utah trounces TCU. It is more likely that 4 of these teams will end up in the top 25.
If we expand 2008 would be used to determine BCS AQ eligibility using 3 top 25 teams for 2009 and 4 for 2010-2012, better then any conference other than the SEC and Big 12. The highest ranked team, likely between 10 and 5, would be significantly higher than the highest ranked team the ACC or Big East can muster. A loss by USC would be detrimental to the PAC 10's case as well.
The fact that we are excited because our conference has a team in the top 10 while our second place team lost by 25 to an out of conference foe indicates that our conference has a way to go yet. That said, look at MWC results from 7-8 years ago and see how meager they look compared to current expectations.
Fresno plays one of the toughest OOC schedules in the nation. They lost a close one to Wisconsin and a close one to last years BCS Cinderella. The top 25 ranking is also contingent on them beating Boise State.
I think you would have 6 teams that consistently battled for the conference title, it would be weighted to the western division. Tulsa and TCU would battle for the shot at the winner of the Utah, BYU, Boise State, Fresno State winner.
The winner of the championship game would average around #10 in the BCS standings, with 3 teams typically ending in the top 25. 7 or 8 of the 12 teams would usually be bowl eligible.
Tulsa has been solid and would likely stay where they have been for the last 5 years. They consistently rank between the top tier MWC teams and the middle tier teams. This would leave them #5 or #6 in the expanded MWC.
TCU has spent good resources on infrastructure. This is how the top MWC and WAC teams have been able to succeed with a limited budget, spending more on capital and less on coaching personnel. Head Coach at TCU is an excellent position and should not be hard to fill with a qualified up and coming coach.
Yes. They play a semi difficult OOC schedule to make up for the fact that the ONLY competitive team that they play in conference is Boise State. The rest of their schedule is a joke. If they were in the MWC, they would have "stiffer competition on a more regular basis."
Fresno State has around a #35 ranking perennially. They are the #2 team in the WAC conference hands down. They normally would probably play the toughest OOC shedule in the country - just about every year. What holds down their SOS is playing in the WAC. Now, in some years they may be around 50th, but they have had a few years recently when they where Top 25. They have lost many games to top teams by only a few points. And, they have probably pulled more "upsets" than any other mid-major school. Traditionally, Fresno State pounds the rock. They can pass the ball also, but when the running game is going, they can be extremely hard to beat. Another thing they do well is to win Bowl games. They have an amazing ability to beat better teams in the bowl games. They are a solid football program and probably getting better.
MWC EAST DIVISION
TCU
Houston (or Tulsa)
Airforce
New Mexico
Colorado State
Wyoming
MWC WEST DIVISION
Utah
BYU
Boise St
Fresno (or Hawaii)
ULVN
San Diego
CHAMPIONSHIP GAME
Play the Conference Championship game in Vegas, Pheonix, or Dallas/Ft Worth. If possible, let the highest ranked division winner pick the game location…
The two division champs would play in the championship game... with ONE exception (call it the "we don't suck like the Big-12" rule). It would read something such as… "If a second place EAST or WEST Division team is ranked more than 15 spots ahead of the opposing Division winner in the Top 25 polls (this would be a compiled average of both the Coaches and AP polls), than that second place Division team will replace the lower-ranked Division winner in the Championship game.”
ALIGNMENT
Geographically speaking, the divisions are perfect.
In the EAST, take Houston over Tulsa. First, it gives the MWC a second school in Texas. Second, it adds to the MWC TV footprint. However, Houston does compete with Texas (and to a much smaller degree Texas A&M) for area fans.
In the WEST, add Fresno over Hawaii. Do this for several reasons. First, you add a second California school. Plus, travel is better.
What is really great about this conference is that it includes TWO schools from California and TWO from Texas. It includes ONE military academy. And it includes TWO religious institutions of which ONE, BYU, garners a large following in the Western US.
CONFERENCE EXCELLENCE
Add several poison pill to any expanded conference contract, and make each school sign the new conference agreement. This agreement would include the following provisions:
FIRST PROVISION--ATTENDANCE (The Wyoming Rule)
(1) If a member team cannot maintain an average home attendance of 25,000+ fans for the years 2011-2015, or
(2) If a member team cannot maintain an average home attendance of 30,000+ fans for the years 2016-2020, or (3) If a team connot maintain an average home attendance of 35,000+ fans for the years 2021-2025, or
(4) If a member team cannot maintain an average home attendance of 40,000+ fans for the years 2026 and beyond, THEN... (see PENALTY ONE)
SECOND PROVISION--SUCCESS (The SDSU Rule)
If a member school does not achieve a .25% winning record over any five year span (FCS schools may not be included in the win category. Only two non-AQ schools may be included yearly in these numbers), THEN…… (see PENALTY ONE)
THIRD PROVISION—FRAUD (The UNLV Rule)
IF A MEMBER institution if found guilty commiting a grevious act of academic or financial fraud (something the seriously jepordizes the integrity of the conference as a whole), THEN…… (see PENALTY ONE)
PENALTY ONE—ATTENDANCE, WINNING, and FRAUD
If a team fails to meet PROVISIONS ONE or TWO, or if a member school is found guilty for fraud (PROVISION THREE), then the member school must agree to gracefully withdraw from the conference if the following actions occur:
(1) IF an FBS school meeting both the ATTENDANCE and SUCCESS requirement in that team’s DIVISION footprint requests admission into the conference, and
(2) At least EIGHT of the twelve conference teams vote on for a "team re-alignment" during their annual meeting.
NOTE: If a member team fails to gracefully withdraw from the conference as a result of a "team re-alignment" vote, then this team will be subject to the financial penalties described in PROVISION A.
FOURTH PROVISION—LEAVING THE CONFERENCE (The Utah/BYU/TCU rule)
If a member school leaves the conference to either (1) go independent or (2) join another conference without first receiving a two-thirds approval from other member schools, then the member school leaving the conference will pay all remaining conference members damages as described in PENALTY A.
PENALTY A—DAMAGES
If a team inflicts harm to the league as decribed in any PROVISION above, the member school is subject to pay the following damages:
(1) The member school must pay each conference member 2 million dollars per year (this figure will be adjusted yearly for inflation using 2010 as the base year) payable to each Conference Member School.
(2) Damages must be paid every year for a period of 10 years.
I think these rules are critical to ensure that the PAC-10 doesn’t pilpher from the conference when they finally get it together. And this also puts certain schools on notice that it is a privilidge, not a right, to be in the conference.
MWC WEST DIVISION
USC
CAL
SDSU
UNLV
OREGON
NEW MEXICO
MWC EAST DIVISION
UTAH
BYU
TCU
CSU
AFA
Wyoming
If they declined, I would then offer to BSU, Fresno, and Houston.
Your first plan was rather good, but let's not go overboard.
You are right though, Texas and Oklahoma would be good additions for the MWC.
Bois St would be a positive move and Pac-10 could take a couple from the WAC-like Fresno St and SDSU the remaining WAC teams could join -C-USA or SunBelt-La Tech belongs in Sunbelt really
UTEP would be a great addition to the MWC
a large city & stadium-good attendance and a fit geographically
Houston, Rice & Tulane are better suited to the C-USA instead of MWC
SMU would be a good MWC addition-located in a large Metro Area would compete more with TCU for recruits
That would free up Texas State for C-USA
Assuming that the MWC really does expand in 2010(ish) with Boise State, Fresno, and Houston (where there is smoke there must be...), I see Conference USA replacing Houston possibly with LA Tech. And the WAC will simply replace BSU, Fresno, and possibly LA Tech with several FCS schools that are about ready to make the jump (Montana, Sacramento State, etc.).
Remember, the MWC won't announce any moves until the BCS confirms the requirements for AQ status. Last time around, the BCS said that a team needed to be in the conference for at least one of the four evaluation years if the conference wanted to include that team in there evaluation (call this the Big-East/Louiseville rule).
If he MWC gets the BCS to commit to this being a requirement for this next evaluation period (2008-2011), and if the requirements remain the same as they were for the last go-around, then the MWC will wait until summer of 2010 to announce expansion. This give BSU and Fresno time for the required "one-year-notice" year in the WAC. And it allows them to join the MWC for the 2011 season.
The problem is the BCS hasn't provided the AQ requirements yet for this evaluation period. Just to keep the MWC out, they would probably remove the Louiseville rule. It's a moving target that seems to change with each evaluation period... anything to keep the 5 non-AQ conferences out.