independent in football.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...cVRywD9HUQMG00
Gutsy move by them.
Just don't see them having any better chance at a BCS bowl than via the MWC. I highly doubt they can put together a schedule that will be very good year in and year out which will hurt their credibility.
Wonder if the MWC schools will boycott them from their future schedules...
Like everything else that happened this offseason, this was about the money. BYU felt it could to better on its own than the 1 Mil the MWC offered through the Mountain. the BCS berth was secondary.
Boise St has to be pissed. Jumping the the MWC didn't really gain them anything.
Had they stayed in the WAC, they'd be looking for a new home anyway.Originally Posted by Bone Buff
yeah I think boise made the right decision. It sucks for the MWC, but it isn't going to kill the conference. I still think its better than the CUSA and WAC even without BYU. Now if they lose TCU, and can't add a Texas school they could be in trouble.
How BYU fills their football schedule is slightly more mysterious than identifying members of the West Coast Conference based on their initials.
SDU
SFU
SCU
SMU
LMU
PU
PU II
GU
Colorado football is not a matter of life and death; it's more important than that.
The MWC remains a good brand and the top non-bcs conference in the country as this point - although C-USA has gotten a bit closer. I don't think it should be overlooked that BYU decided to go the WCC route instead of trying to piece back together the WAC with additional schools. That says to me that the WAC is done and that is a positive development for the MWC as well. Basically you have two legetimate non-BCS conferences left over. C-USA and the MWC. Hopefully that increases the chances that these conferences work out a "play-in" championship game for an auto BCS bid in the coming years.
This has a chance to work out well for the 10 remaining teams. With BYU gone the MTN Network contract is void and the confernence can hopefully negotiate a better t.v. deal that will bring more money than the programs were seeing even with BYU and Utah in the conference. Also - the $5Million dollar buyout that Nevada and Fresno faced is also a moot point - as those clauses could only be enforced if BYU had associated itself with the WAC. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Doesn't BYU claim they have something like 80,000,000 potential television viewers around the world? Maybe CU should go private and become a Muslim university? We could go independent and televise all our games on Al Jazeera! We'd make a frigging fortune! Move over Texas!
I don't want to see our cheerleaders & dance team wearing burkas.
How is it that the MWC will be able to get a better TV deal without Utah and now BYU in the conference? Was their previous TV deal that antiquated? I think that MWC games are limited to being on Versus or the MTN, so I could certainly see where that would be limiting factor in their previous TV deal.
There is no place like Nebraska...THANK GOD!!!!
"I went to State" could mean a hundred different places. "I went to Colorado" can only mean one.
That was exactly it. The deal with Comcast/CBS Sports for the MTN network was terribly antiquated and limited the games as you described (i.e. Versus and the MTN). My understanding is that the deal with Comcast was contigent upon both BYU and Utah being in the conference. With them out - I think we will see a new deal being negotiated by the MWC. With Boise and TCU still in the fold and Fresno, Nevada and Boise actually bringing in a net gain in television markets compared to the loss of the SLC market...I think there is a chance that some of the MWC teams could actually make more money. Hell it can't get any worse...I think the television deal with Comcast was netting the programs $1.2 Million per year. The MWC conference even without Utah and BYU should be able to negotiate a deal in and around $15 Million/year or $1.5 Million per team/per year I would think.
Last edited by CsquaredCC; 09-01-2010 at 01:54 PM.
I heard Gary Barnett on the radio the other day. I just caught the tail end. He said that he believes there will eventually be four 16 team super conferences. That would fit right into a playoff system. It would also screw half the D1 teams in the country. Presumably the non profitable ones. I didn't hear him address it, but I also assume these "super" teams might bolt the NCAA. FWIW.
I saw this on the horizon when there was first talk of expansion to 16 teams in the Pac. I still think it's going to happen, and I still think the four super conferences will bolt the NCAA.
It does bring up an interesting scenario for the Pac, though. Who are the other 4 schools? Texas? I think they left such a greasy slime trail that the Pac presidents & AD's would rather chew off their own arms. I think what the Pac does is scalp the top four teams off of the MWC pile and call it good. Don't be surprised if one day, the Pac includes UNM, TCU, CSU and UNLV. If I were an admin at any of those schools, I'd be doing my level best to increase the academic standing of the school while simultaneously increasing the athletic profile of the school.
Expansion is going to happen again. There's too much money and power at stake for it not to.
As for the other D-1 teams being screwed, I'm not so sure. BYU is going independent. Texas will probably go independent. Once the mass consolidation takes place, everybody who's not in one of the conferences will technically be independent. That opens up a lot of possibilities for scheduling. The kicker here will be for the teams in the super-conferences to set their OOC schedules. If they bolt the NCAA, they will have a hard time scheduling independent teams for their OOC games. In some ways, this is great, because it sets up some great inter-sectional games that are completely avoided now.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
