F you Loyal you dumb POS! Better?95, I'm starting to grow tired of having someone on this board actually agree with the supreme wisdom of the mighty and all-knowing Loyal One. It's taking the fun out of it. You need to stop posting.
More on Mtn West, TV
- Thread starter Loyal Coug1
- Start date
The 9 votes can dissolve the MWC then there would be no exit fees. Plus, the 9 votes could bring with them the NCAA Tourney "units" we've earned minus some payout to the "left out 2". It's the cleanest way to do it.
I agree with the Memphis, Tulane, Rice, and Tulsa. The only way that would be acceptable to me is if our media partners increase our payouts significantly to warrant their additions. I would rather grab a school like USD. Wait a minute before you mf me. My thought is to weaken the WCC to where we can grab St. Mary's and Gonzaga for their basketball. Just saying.
I'm going to agree with your agreement that it's unlikely that those teams bring value. If they did have real value, they would already have been picked up by the Big 12. Tulsa is a distant third fiddle to Oklahoma and OSU. Rice is the 7th best program in Texas....if they are lucky. Nobody in Louisiana cares about Tulane except their alums. Everyone else in that state roots for LSU or La Tech. Memphis is arguably the only one worth discussing and when they are 400 miles further east of me.....they are not a west coast school.
There is 12 members of the MTN West conference. As you noted, only 9 of those 12 have to vote to dissolve MTN West, so the PAC 2 doesn't have to take all 12 and can take 9 and leave the worst 3 behind.
The way the MTN West exit fees work. There is about a 35 mil exit fee to be paid to the MTN West conference, if a MTN West conference member leaves the conference before a certain time. That time is ABOUT, BETWEEN ABOUT, A RANGE OF ABOUT 1,2 years. At the end of that time period, BSU, etc, could leave conference, with NO exit fee penalty.
Using those 2 methods, the PAC 2 can cherry pick the MTN West, and there isn't anything Gloria can do to stop that, if that happens.
Memphis, Tulane are better then the MTN West except for BSU, maybe SDSU, maybe Fresno St. the rest of the MTN West is worse than Memphis, Tulane. Memphis, Tulane, BSU, SDSU, Fresno St are the equivalent of Power Conference level programs.
And I don't want Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, etc, and only want Memphis, Tulane.
It was CANZANO who said that Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, are suspected targets.
CANZANO did not mention Memphis, Tulane.
Memphis, Tulane are better then Rice, Tulsa, UTSA,
Memphis, Tulane are in the ABOUT, GENERAL semi south, semi central, semi south Midwestern ish area.
Basically Memphis, Tulane is BETWEEN Big 12, SEC lands, so Memphis, Tulane are a semi southwestern ish to semi south midwesternish to semi southcentral ish, semi westernish teams.
True.
Exit fees are based on annual payouts. Those include media rights payments, NCAA Tourney credits, and the Pac-12 Scheduling Agreement. The exit cost is 3 times the annual payout for 1 year notice. Anything less than one year "doubles" the exit fee (( 3 x annual payout) x 2). The only way to get the least exit fee is if the media rights expire in 2026. Gloria is not going to let a year go by without a media contract. She has already hired a consultant, Endeavor, to begin the media rights contract negotiations. In 2026 our media rights will be larger and you can be sure that our exit fees will be higher.
Rice, Tulsa, UTSA are worthless. Memphis, Tulane are Power Conference level equivalent programs. Memphis is, has been a POWERHOUSE in bball, and TULANE IS A POWERHOUSE IN FOOTBALL, consistently going 11-1, and making it to the NY6, January bowls.
Only BSU, is better from a BEST G5 standpoint(Not geography standpoint), then Memphis, Tulane.
I think you mean USF, not USD. If you do mean USF, I would be in favor of them, but Canzano and the rest of you were talking about a WESTERN conference, and USF is definitely not western. If you were talking about USD, USD is probably not good enough.
The media will only increase payout for:
BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, Airforce, Utah St, Memphis, Tulane, OSU, WSU as a conference, as part of PAC 10(X)
That would get ABOUT, AROUND 17,18,19 mil per team per year, 1 CFP, 1 NY6, Alamo, Vegas, Holiday bowls, hybrid G5/P5 status.
Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, Colorado St, Wyoming, would just be cannon fodder filler, that would not increase media payout value, etc.
You should try looking at a map. Neither Memphis or Tulane can claim to be even remotely “westernish.” Unless you mean western Tennessee, or western Gulf coast.
When you’re done with the map, look at some data. Tulane & Memphis had pretty good seasons in 2023, going a combined 21-6. In spite of their success, their combined viewership was roughly the same as Colorado state’s. You’re also mostly wrong about the MWC. BSU drew only slightly more than Memphis, and less than Tulane. SDSU draws dick - less than 20K in the stands and less than 200K on TV. Fresno draws fans to the stadium (close to 40K) but nobody to TV (196K). Wyoming, SJSU, and UNLV all outdrew SDSU & Fresno.
Tulane is a powerhouse in football? On what planet?
They won the AAC in 2022 and went to the Cotton Bowl. Before that, their last NY6 appearance was in 1940. Their last conference championship before 2022 was a C-USA title in 1998. Before that, it was 1949. Their record since 2000 is 94-172…with only 6 seasons above .500.
Really Mik? Tulane is a Powerhouse in Football? Yes they were good the last 2 years in the AAC. 0-3 against Power 5 teams. And all those January, NY6 bowls! All one of them.
2008-2023 results (from Tulane's Media Guide, which of course cannot be trusted to be accurate).
2008 2-10 C-USA (1-7/5th West)
2009 3-9 C-USA (1-7/6th West)
2010 4-8 C-USA (2-6/6th West)
2011 2-11 C-USA (1-7/6th West)
2012 2-10 C-USA (2-5/6th West)
2013 7-6 C-USA (5-3/4th West)/NEW ORLEANS BOWL
2014 3-9 American (2-6/8th)
2015 3-9 American (1-7/6th West)
2016 4-8 American (1-7/6th West)
2017 5-7 American (3-5/5th West)
2018 7-6 American (5-3/T1st West)/AUTONATION CURE BOWL
2019 7-6 American (3-5/4th West)/LOCKHEED MARTIN ARMED FORCES BOWL
2020 6-6 American (3-5/8th)/FAMOUS IDAHO POTATO BOWL
2021 2-10 American (1-7/9th)
2022 12-2 American (7-1/1st)/AAC CHAMPIONS/GOODYEAR COTTON BOWL
2023 11-3 American (8-0/1st)/AAC CHAMPIONS/MILITARY BOWL
I’ve been making sense here for over 20 years. Not my fault you’re just noticing.95, I'm starting to grow tired of having someone on this board actually agree with the supreme wisdom of the mighty and all-knowing Loyal One. It's taking the fun out of it. You need to stop posting.
Not talking just fan attendance, TV numbers.
NATIONAL BRAND, RECORD IN FOOTBALL, BOWLS, PRESTIGE, NY6, ALL OF MANY FACTORS COMBINED TOGETHER.
And BSU, the last 17 years is one of the better, best G5 programs, better the Colorado St, better the Tulane.
And BSU, SDSU, FRESNO ST, MEMPHIS, TULANE, ARE THE BEST G5's
The best based on what, exactly?
Also, if you’re basing this on bowls and branding, you’re ignoring the only thing that matters in CFB today: market and marketability. You know who doesn’t have any of those things? SDSU, Fresno, Memphis, Tulane, and BSU.
Ask, Poll ALL hardcore College football fans, coaches, sports media, etc, all over the country, each of the last about 20 years WHO THE BEST G5(S)(NOT HOUSTON AND OTHERS THAT JOINED A POWER CONFERENCE) are, etc, and they would, will probably say BSU, Memphis, Tulane, USF, SDSU, Fresno St, Airforce, Utah State, UNLV, based on them being either football or bball powers, NATIONAL BRAND, Record, Bowls, NCAA tournaments/Elite 8's, Final Fours(bball), NY6, January bowls, fans, attendance, TV, PRESTIGE, Reputation, Recruiting, money, coaches, top players, players in NFL, NBA, TRADITION, STORIED, ETC, ALL THOSE LOTS OF FACTORS COMBINED TOGETHER, AND NOT JUST ONLY ONE FACTOR LIKE JUST ONLY FAN ATTENDANCE OR JUST ONLY TV.
If you ask them who Wyoming, Colorado St, etc, are, and if they are the best G5's, hard core fans, coaches, players, Sports Media would probably say Wyoming, Colorado St, etc, WHO, WHO THE HELL ARE THEY?
Mik - we've already ascertained that Tulane is NOT a FB power. Basketball? Let's see - last NCAA appearance? 1994. Messy clip, but 19-year history below. They suck in BB.
I might work on Memphis later. And BTW, fans and TV ratings are really all that matters these days.
| 20 | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| k | Season | Conf | W | L | W-L% | W | L | W-L% | SRS | SOS | PS/G | PA/G | AP Pre | AP High | AP Final | NCAA Tournament | Seed | Coach(es) |
| 1 | 2023-24 | AAC | 14 | 17 | .452 | 5 | 13 | .278 | 3.99 | 3.03 | 81.9 | 80.0 | ||||||
| 2 | 2022-23 | AAC | 20 | 11 | .645 | 12 | 6 | .667 | 5.46 | 2.69 | 79.9 | 77.2 | ||||||
| 3 | 2021-22 | AAC | 14 | 15 | .483 | 10 | 8 | .556 | 6.74 | 5.33 | 73.1 | 71.7 | ||||||
| 4 | 2020-21 | AAC | 10 | 13 | .435 | 4 | 12 | .250 | 1.03 | 3.59 | 63.9 | 66.5 | ||||||
| 5 | 2019-20 | AAC | 12 | 18 | .400 | 4 | 14 | .222 | 0.94 | 3.54 | 68.3 | 70.9 | ||||||
| 6 | 2018-19 | AAC | 4 | 27 | .129 | 0 | 18 | .000 | -6.72 | 3.63 | 67.2 | 77.5 | ||||||
| 7 | 2017-18 | AAC | 14 | 17 | .452 | 5 | 13 | .278 | 1.21 | 2.08 | 73.2 | 74.1 | ||||||
| 8 | 2016-17 | AAC | 6 | 25 | .194 | 3 | 15 | .167 | -3.98 | 4.25 | 70.3 | 78.5 | ||||||
| 9 | 2015-16 | AAC | 12 | 22 | .353 | 3 | 15 | .167 | -0.85 | 3.79 | 65.9 | 70.5 | ||||||
| 10 | 2014-15 | AAC | 15 | 16 | .484 | 6 | 12 | .333 | -1.51 | 0.32 | 63.6 | 64.0 | ||||||
| 11 | 2013-14 | CUSA | 17 | 17 | .500 | 8 | 8 | .500 | -7.89 | -1.73 | 63.6 | 69.3 | ||||||
| 12 | 2012-13 | CUSA | 20 | 15 | .571 | 6 | 10 | .375 | 1.87 | -1.80 | 69.6 | 65.7 | ||||||
| 13 | 2011-12 | CUSA | 15 | 16 | .484 | 3 | 13 | .188 | -0.12 | -1.61 | 64.6 | 61.6 | ||||||
| 14 | 2010-11 | CUSA | 13 | 17 | .433 | 3 | 13 | .188 | -0.28 | -0.68 | 68.6 | 65.8 | ) | |||||
| 15 | 2009-10 | CUSA | 8 | 22 | .267 | 3 | 13 | .188 | -3.20 | 1.50 | 62.1 | 66.8 | ||||||
| 16 | 2008-09 | CUSA | 14 | 17 | .452 | 7 | 9 | .438 | -1.30 | 0.90 | 65.1 | 66.3 | ||||||
| 17 | 2007-08 | CUSA | 17 | 15 | .531 | 6 | 10 | .375 | 0.41 | 2.15 | 65.7 | 66.4 | ||||||
| 18 | 2006-07 | CUSA | 17 | 13 | .567 | 9 | 7 | .563 | 0.49 | 0.63 | 69.2 | 68.0 | ||||||
| 19 | 2005-06 | CUSA | 12 | 17 | .414 | 6 | 8 | .429 | -5.44 | -0.67 | 63.2 | 66.3 |
I continue to be of the opinion that the best path forward for WSU and OSU is to form the best West Coast Conference they can. If there's an opportunity to create a scheduling partnership with another top G5 conference in football, that's fine, but focus first on the West Coast.
Talk with the WCC about potential agreements for the Olympic (non-football) sports. If they could somehow form a 24 program West coast super league for the Olympic sports, it would be a hugely marketable affiliation to recruits. Men's and Women's basketball would be elite. So would Baseball, Volleyball, Soccer, Golf, Crew, etc. Knock down the FCS and G5 barriers and interview all of the West coast programs who might be interested. Montana would be a great addition. So would the Dakota's.
We have to use West coast regionality to our advantage. We're not going to be able to win the college football arms race vs. the Midwest, Southwest, and Southeast, but by competing in a West coast super conference in the other sports, you appeal to the majority of student athletes who don't want to play Baseball or Women's basketball in New Jersey.
Talk with the WCC about potential agreements for the Olympic (non-football) sports. If they could somehow form a 24 program West coast super league for the Olympic sports, it would be a hugely marketable affiliation to recruits. Men's and Women's basketball would be elite. So would Baseball, Volleyball, Soccer, Golf, Crew, etc. Knock down the FCS and G5 barriers and interview all of the West coast programs who might be interested. Montana would be a great addition. So would the Dakota's.
We have to use West coast regionality to our advantage. We're not going to be able to win the college football arms race vs. the Midwest, Southwest, and Southeast, but by competing in a West coast super conference in the other sports, you appeal to the majority of student athletes who don't want to play Baseball or Women's basketball in New Jersey.
For the MWC we will probably have 6 teams in the NCAA Tourney this year. That is a first but at a minimum we will pick up 6 units. Last year the MWC picked up a total of 8 units thanks to SDSU. So in terms of cash value the 2022-2023 season 8 units will earn over the 6 years distribution just over ~$20,000,000. This 2023-2024 season if we lose all first round games we will end up with a minimum of ~$15,000,000 over the 6 year distribution period.
Why would we want to share that kind of money with the WCC? And in the MWC down years you'll have the Zags bitching about feeding 24 mouths.
Overall, I like your idea but, somehow we need to separate our revenue sports. I can't think of a way to do it where it works for all 24 schools.
You make a great point. I guess I'm under the impression that conferences are going to get bigger, and if that's the case, I'd rather see a Western regional conference as opposed to a scattering of West programs mixed in with scraps from the East and Southwest.
As of today, and for the foreseeable future, football is king. I do think that out West the Olympic/Title IX sports are going to see significant growth. Youth football out West is declining, but the basketball, baseball, soccer, and women's athletics as a whole are going to expand. Will that offset the football shortfall? No way in Hell, but it will be important for our schools as it relates to enrollment, campus excitement, etc.
College basketball is an important sport for WSU moving forward, and being in the best West coast league is critical. I think UW and Oregon are going to have a hard time selling recruits of the "other sports" on the National conference stuff.
You nailed it that the more units, the bigger the piece of money pie a team, program wins in basketball AND football, and according to their Brand, reputation, clout, credit, the money they can get Fox, ESPN to dole out(Fox, ESPN will give higher pay per team per year for having BSU in conference, then having PODUNK WHO(Colorado St, Wyoming, etc), bowls, NY6 January Bowls, 1 of 12 CFP spots, fan attendance, TV, etc, ALL COMBINED TOGETHER(And not just only either fan attendance or TV numbers alone for 1 season alone(Like 95's silly example of saying that Colorado St, Wyoming, better then BSU, because either fan attendence or TV numbers were just barely temporarily higher better then BSU for 1 season, because of 1 season or a small, temporary handful of seasons of success, etc).
FCS, WAC, BOTTOM DWELLING MWC teams are NOT WORTH IT.
ONLY BSU, SDSU, FRESNO ST, UNLV, AIRFORCE, UTAH STATE, WSU, OSU, MEMPHIS, TULANE WILL BE CONSISTENTLY GOOD ENOUGH, BIG ENOUGH, ALL THE ABOVE FACTORS COMBINED TOGETHER, ONLY THAT ARRANGEMENT OF A WESTERN CONFERENCE WOULD, WILL BE A HYBRID G5/P5, CONFERENCE THAT WOULD GET ABOUT 16 MIL TO 20 MIL PER TEAM PER YEAR FROM MEDIA, FOX, ESPN, BIGGER BETTER BOWL MONEY, MORE, BETTER NY6 JANUARY BOWL MONEY, VIA 1 NY6, JANUARY BOWL SPOT, MORE, BETTER CFP MONEY VIA 1 OF 12 CFP SPOT,MORE BETTER NCAA TOURNAMENT UNITS, ETC.
Thats a lot better then:
WSU, OSU, All 12 of MTN West teams.
And better then:
WSU, OSU, Colorado St, Wyoming, Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico, New Mexico St, North Dakotah State, South Dakotah St, Montana, EWU.
And better then:
WSU, OSU, Top 9 MTN West programs, EWU, Montana, North Dakotah St, South Dakotah St.
And better then joining the MTN West conference.
And it's better because it MAKES MORE MONEY, then the other conference arrangement options,
16-20 mil per team per year+ bowl money + NY6 January Bowl money + CFP money is BETTER THEN the 5,6,7,8,9 mil per team per year + lower, lesser bowl money +lower, lesser NY6, January Bowl money, + lower, lesser CFP money.
MONEY IS KING, CRITICAL.
AND YOU DO WHAT WILL GET YOU THE MOST MONEY EVEN IF THAT MEANS THAT YOU GET THE BEST G5 PROGRAMS FROM ALL OVER THE WEST, CENTRAL, SOUTH, NORTH, EAST, ALL OVER THE USA, COAST TO COAST, ETC, EVEN IF THAT MEANS THAT YOU HATE IT, BECAUSE ITS NOT JUST STRICTLY A WEST COAST ONLY CONFERENCE.
YOU FIND WAYS TO DEAL WITH THE TRAVEL, OTHER PROBLEMS, BY, LIKE USING PODS, DIVISIONS, ETC.
For the purpose of this post, "CANZANO RUMOR" = OSU + WSU + Boise St + Fresno St + UNVL + SDSU + Colorado St + 1 more.
Assuming the PAC-2 (OSU & WSU) can't get into a power conference, then what I see online is:
100 % of Oregon State fans want the CANZANO RUMOR.
50% of Washington St. fans want the CANZANO RUMOR.
50% of WSU fans want PAC-2 + MWC
I believe TV networks, be it ESPN, Fox, or CBS want the CANZANO RUMOR.
Why do TV networks want the CANZANO RUMOR? Let's say Washington St. has a really hot football team. The TV networks want to televise games that look like this:
* WSU vs UNLV
* WSU vs SDSU
* WSU vs Fresno St.
* WSU vs OSU
The TV networks don't want to televise games that look like this:
* WSU vs Nevada
* WSU vs New Mexico
* WSU vs Hawaii
* WSU vs Utah State
To guarantee the networks get the first list of games, you have to prune away the bottom half of the MWC. Dump the dregs.
Given that Beaver fans and the networks don't want a PAC-2 + MWC merger, then it's not going to happen.
Assuming the PAC-2 (OSU & WSU) can't get into a power conference, then what I see online is:
100 % of Oregon State fans want the CANZANO RUMOR.
50% of Washington St. fans want the CANZANO RUMOR.
50% of WSU fans want PAC-2 + MWC
I believe TV networks, be it ESPN, Fox, or CBS want the CANZANO RUMOR.
Why do TV networks want the CANZANO RUMOR? Let's say Washington St. has a really hot football team. The TV networks want to televise games that look like this:
* WSU vs UNLV
* WSU vs SDSU
* WSU vs Fresno St.
* WSU vs OSU
The TV networks don't want to televise games that look like this:
* WSU vs Nevada
* WSU vs New Mexico
* WSU vs Hawaii
* WSU vs Utah State
To guarantee the networks get the first list of games, you have to prune away the bottom half of the MWC. Dump the dregs.
Given that Beaver fans and the networks don't want a PAC-2 + MWC merger, then it's not going to happen.
Last edited:
Utah St is known for being a better program overall more consistently then Colorado St, over the last about 13 to 17 to 20 years.
Same with Airforce being better then Colorado St, etc.
The teams will likely be WSU, OSU, BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, Airforce, Utah St.
Colorado St, Wyoming, Hawaii, New Mexico St, Nevada, New Mexico St, likely get left behind, unless take top 9 MWC, and leave worst 3 behind.
But overall your right that that's the overall general idea, right way that will probably get done as far as the skeleton, bones, frame, body of the idea, way.
Then either stay at PAC 8
Or become PAC 10 by adding Memphis Tulane
Or become the PAC 10-12 by adding either Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, or Any mix, combination of Memphis, Tulane, Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, etc.
That's the CANZANO Rumor.
Interesting idea, but I disagree. I think Cal and Furd already have pseudo-league affiliations for some of their many sports (Women's beach volleyball anyone?). With as few programs as WSU has, I don't see us being much of a player. The Mountain West sponsors every sport we have except Crew, BTW.
Montana and the Dakotas are not the West Coast.
Mikalalas -
No argument here about Utah State being better than Colorado State football wise. But the state of Utah has 3.3 million people along with BYU & Univ. of Utah, two Power 4 schools. Colorado has 5.8 million and just Coach Prime's Power 4 school. My naive guess is that Colorado St. would bring more eyeballs on TV than Utah St.
By the way, you mentioned in a previous post the possibility of Cal returning to a west coast conference. From what I've read all over, that's a possibility, assuming Cal can be released from the ACC's GOR. Two or three things I know:
1 - Cal is in serious financial trouble and a reduced share of ACC media revenue isn't helping
2 - Cal is a public school, and given their financial trouble, is in no position to be as snobby as Stanford
3 - When Oregon State played football at Cal last year, one of the Beaver's broadcasters, Jim Wilson, talked to a lot of people in the Cal athletic department. All of them absolutely hated the idea of Cal joining the ACC.
I vote to stay at 8 schools and wait for PAC-12 schools to come crawling back in 5 or 6 years. At a reduced share of the media revenue, of course.
Dave
Last edited:
Mik, when is your hard on for Memphis and Tulane going to go down?
We have already established, despite your quadrupling down with no factual basis (me and 95 provided it) that Tulane sucks in FB and BB and has very little market or fans.
Memphis is not much better in FB. They have done OK in BB, although factor in what conference(s) they play in. I'm posting Memphis's FB and BB results here in a minute.
And what is this?
Mik said: Basically Memphis, Tulane is BETWEEN Big 12, SEC lands, so Memphis, Tulane are a semi southwestern ish to semi south midwesternish to semi southcentral ish, semi westernish teams.
Just give it a rest. Your nonsense is reaching epic proportions. But you keep doubling and tripling and quadrupling and quintupling down on your ridiculous BS. Oh, hybrid P5/G5 status. Oh 16,17,18,19 million in media money. All pulled out of your ass.
Memphis - the P5 powerhouse? A lot of lame bowls:
FB:
| Overall | Conference | |||||||
| Year | Conf | W | L | T | W | L | T | Bowl |
2023 | American | 10 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 0 | Liberty Bowl (W) |
2022 | American | 7 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 | First Responder Bowl (W) |
2021 | American | 6 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 | |
2020 | American | 8 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | Montgomery Bowl (W) |
2019 | American | 12 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | Cotton Bowl (L) |
2018 | American | 8 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | Birmingham Bowl (L) |
2017 | American | 10 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | Liberty Bowl (L) |
2016 | American | 8 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | Boca Raton Bowl (L) |
2015 | American | 9 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | Birmingham Bowl (L) |
2014 | American | 10 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | Miami Beach Bowl (W) |
2013 | American | 3 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | |
2012 | CUSA | 4 | 8 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | |
2011 | CUSA | 2 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | |
2010 | CUSA | 1 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | |
2009 | CUSA | 2 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | |
2008 | CUSA | 6 | 7 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | St. Petersburg Bowl (L) |
2007 | CUSA | 7 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 0 | New Orleans Bowl (L) |
2006 | CUSA | 2 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | |
2005 | CUSA | 7 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | Motor City Bowl (W) |
2004 | CUSA | 8 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | GMAC Bowl (L) |
2003 | CUSA | 9 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | New Orleans Bowl (W) |
2002 | CUSA | 3 | 9 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 0 | |
2001 | CUSA | 5 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 0 | |
2000 | CUSA | 4 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 0 | |
1999 | CUSA | 5 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | |
1998 | CUSA | 2 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | |
1997 | CUSA | 4 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 |
Memphis BBall:
| Memphis Basketball - Not bad (but consider the league they play in). Some pretty good teams back in 2005-2013. Recently, not so much. Certainly not a powerhouse these days. | |||||||||
| Overall | Conference | ||||||||
| Season | Conf | W | L | W-L% | W | L | W-L% | NCAA Tournament | Seed |
| 2023-24 | AAC | 22 | 10 | 0.688 | 11 | 7 | 0.611 | ||
| 2022-23 | ` | 26 | 9 | 0.743 | 13 | 5 | 0.722 | Lost NCAA Tournament First Round | 8 |
| 2021-22 | AAC | 22 | 11 | 0.667 | 13 | 5 | 0.722 | Lost NCAA Tournament Second Round | 9 |
| 2020-21 | AAC | 20 | 8 | 0.714 | 11 | 4 | 0.733 | ||
| 2019-20 | AAC | 21 | 10 | 0.677 | 10 | 8 | 0.556 | ||
| 2018-19 | AAC | 22 | 14 | 0.611 | 11 | 7 | 0.611 | ||
| 2017-18 | AAC | 21 | 13 | 0.618 | 10 | 8 | 0.556 | ||
| 2016-17 | AAC | 19 | 13 | 0.594 | 9 | 9 | 0.5 | ||
| 2015-16 | AAC | 19 | 15 | 0.559 | 8 | 10 | 0.444 | ||
| 2014-15 | AAC | 18 | 14 | 0.563 | 10 | 8 | 0.556 | ||
| 2013-14 | AAC | 24 | 10 | 0.706 | 12 | 6 | 0.667 | Lost NCAA Tournament Third Round | 8 |
| 2012-13 | CUSA | 31 | 5 | 0.861 | 16 | 0 | 1 | Lost NCAA Tournament Third Round | 6 |
| 2011-12 | CUSA | 26 | 9 | 0.743 | 13 | 3 | 0.813 | Lost NCAA Tournament Second Round | 8 |
| 2010-11 | CUSA | 25 | 10 | 0.714 | 10 | 6 | 0.625 | Lost NCAA Tournament Second Round | 12 |
| 2009-10 | CUSA | 24 | 10 | 0.706 | 13 | 3 | 0.813 | ||
| 2008-09 | CUSA | 33 | 4 | 0.892 | 16 | 0 | 1 | Lost NCAA Tournament Regional Semifinal | 2 |
| 2007-08 | CUSA | 38* | 2* | 0.95 | 16 | 0 | 1 | Lost NCAA Tournament National Final* | 1 |
| 2006-07 | CUSA | 33 | 4 | 0.892 | 16 | 0 | 1 | Lost NCAA Tournament Regional Final | 2 |
| 2005-06 | CUSA | 33 | 4 | 0.892 | 13 | 1 | 0.929 | Lost NCAA Tournament Regional Final | 1 |
Not pulled out of my but. Various sources LIKE CANZANO, WILNER, EXPERTS, ETC, TYPES(not saying specifically that it was CANZANO, Wilner), have said that. I have found, read, etc, many sources that said that IF WSU, OSU, PAC 2 rebuild with the best G5's in nation, like BSU, etc, that the PAC would get ABOUT 15 mil to 20 mil per team per year, instead of getting the ABOUT 5,6,7,8 mil per team per year, that either, both the MWC + WSU, OSU, and PAC 2 BRAND + WHOLE ENTIRE MWC, would get.
That also Jives with the LOGIC that Fox, ESPN, sports media, etc, will pay MORE, About 1.5 times, 1.75 times, double, 2.5 times, etc, for the best, better programs, then a conference full of weaker programs.
SO IT MAKES SENSE THAT AT ULTIMATE WORST CASE SCENARIO, the PAC X filled with the best G5 teams will get at least a about 14 mil per team per year, better then the about 5,6,7,8, mil per team per year of the MWC, etc.
As to Why 20 mil, and why not 23, 25, 27, at the upper range?
The PAC 12 was offered 30 mil per year, per team. A conference comprised of the best G5's in the nation aren't going to get close to 30 mil, thus the LOGICAL EXTRAPOLATED MOST LIKELY APPROXIMATE, ETC, RANGE IS, would probably be about 15 mil to 20 mil. And that Jives with the sources that I have read.
What your not getting, is that FOX, ESPN, sports media are not just only going by just the data, and don't interpret the data the same way.
If they did WSU as the 4th, 5th best TV numbers in PAC 12 program, would not have been left out behind, and would be in a P4 conference now over some of the other 10 other PAC 12 teams.
Take Michigan, and Nebraska, etc, most fans, coaches, players, sports media, etc, would say that Michigan, Nebraska, are TOP programs, etc, but if you just look at statistics, data, then except for the harbaugh years Michigan, over the past about 27 years, has been INCONSISTENT, up and down, etc.
And it's been a long time since the Glory days of Nebraska. But fans, coaches, players, sports media, the so called experts, etc, would say that Michigan, Nebraska should get more money, because the supposedly add more value, are supposedly top programs, are supposedly CONSISTENTLY good, ALMOST ALL THE TIME, etc.
So since that isn't true, data, statistics, facts, etc, wise, then why do they say that, those things?
Answer:
Because of Michigan, and Nebraska's STORIED, TRADITION, REPUTATION, NATIONAL BRAND, CLOUT, PERCEPTION, ETC.
Almost everybody perceives, believes, knows, thinks, that Michigan, Nebraska is better then, and know who Michigan, Nebraska is, over, then PODUNK WHO U, that better then Nebraska statistical, data wise.
And because of the better perception that most people think Michigan, Nebraska is better then PODUNK WHO U UNIVERSITY, even tho PODUNK WHO U UNIVERSITY IS BETTER ACCORDING TO DATA, the sports media, Fox, ESPN want Michigan, Nebraska in a P4, OVER, INSTEAD of PODUNK WHO U UNIVERSITY.
That same kind of thing is why BSU, WSU, OSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, Airforce, Utah St, Memphis, Tulane, USF, are considered by fans, people, coaches, players, sports media, Fox, ESPN, etc, to be the best G5 programs in nation.
I know that that doesn't make sense, logic in a way that they do that, and that they don't go by just only the facts, data, but that's the way it is.
They don't use just only 1 thing, they use a amalgamation, COMBINATION of ALL THE FACTORS, THINGS.
THINGS LIKE:
STORIED TRADITION, NATIONAL BRAND, REPUTATION, PERCEIVED PERCEPTION OF, CLOUT, INFLUENCE, MARKETING, BOWLS, NY6 JANUARY BOWLS, CFP, RECORD, SUCCESS, FAN ATTENDANCE, TV NUMBERS, ETC, ALL COMBINED TOGETHER, AND NOT JUST ONLY ONE OF THOSE FACTORS BY ITSELF.
You may disagree, but then again, YOUR NOT THE REST OF THE FANS, COACHES, PLAYERS, SPORTS MEDIA, FOX, ESPN, ETC, AND YOUR NOT ESPN, FOX, THAT PAY MORE FOR BSU, SDSU, FRESNO ST, UNLV, AIRFORCE, UTAH STATE, MEMPHIS, TULANE, USF, THE BEST G5'S IN NATION.
There is a reason why Memphis, Tulane, USF are RUMORED to join the ACC, and that's because they are CONSIDERED the best, better G5's in Nation, because of all the above factors combined together, despite your data seeming to might be saying otherwise.
Last edited:
To clarify, New Mexico State and New Mexico State are not Mtn West members.
To your point in another post about your BFF's Tulane and Memphis, yes they are looked at as potential ACC backfill teams. The fact that they are in the East probably has something to do with that.
In the end, it really doesn’t matter how competitive any team or group of teams is, or what bowl games they’ve been to. The only factors that are meaningful at all are how many people watch their games - on TV, not in person - and (a distant 2nd most important) how many people are likely to watch based on their market.
Neither Memphis or Tulane is meaningful in that context. Their viewership is low, and their market growth is limited by the big teams that own their markets already. Colorado state already gets more viewers than the rest of the MWC - far more than Utah state - and is the #2 in their market, while USU is #3 at best in a smaller market. UNLV has decent market potential and little competition. SJSU & SDSU are in big markets, but both are crowded and historically indifferent. BSU, OSU, and WSU have followings, but their growth potential is hard to quantify because they’re in small markets.
With that as context, the smartest play really seems to be to regionalize. Don’t look closely at individual team markets - just try to grab the biggest possible percentage of the western viewership as a block.
That most likely means combining with most of the MWC. I think the expendables are Hawaii, New Mexico, and one of Nevada/Air Force/Wyoming. I
You obviously either did not read or get or understand this, what was said earlier:
What your not getting, is that FOX, ESPN, sports media are not just only going by just the data, and don't interpret the data the same way.
If they did WSU as the 4th, 5th best TV numbers in PAC 12 program, would not have been left out behind, and would be in a P4 conference now over some of the other 10 other PAC 12 teams.
Take Michigan, and Nebraska, etc, most fans, coaches, players, sports media, etc, would say that Michigan, Nebraska, are TOP programs, etc, but if you just look at statistics, data, then except for the harbaugh years Michigan, over the past about 27 years, has been INCONSISTENT, up and down, etc.
And it's been a long time since the Glory days of Nebraska. But fans, coaches, players, sports media, the so called experts, etc, would say that Michigan, Nebraska should get more money, because the supposedly add more value, are supposedly top programs, are supposedly CONSISTENTLY good, ALMOST ALL THE TIME, etc.
So since that isn't true, data, statistics, facts, etc, wise, then why do they say that, those things?
Answer:
Because of Michigan, and Nebraska's STORIED, TRADITION, REPUTATION, NATIONAL BRAND, CLOUT, PERCEPTION, ETC.
Almost everybody perceives, believes, knows, thinks, that Michigan, Nebraska is better then, and know who Michigan, Nebraska is, over, then PODUNK WHO U, that better then Nebraska statistical, data wise.
And because of the better perception that most people think Michigan, Nebraska is better then PODUNK WHO U UNIVERSITY, even tho PODUNK WHO U UNIVERSITY IS BETTER ACCORDING TO DATA, the sports media, Fox, ESPN want Michigan, Nebraska in a P4, OVER, INSTEAD of PODUNK WHO U UNIVERSITY.
And you didn't read or understand this as well:
They don't use just only 1 thing, they use a amalgamation, COMBINATION of ALL THE FACTORS, THINGS.
THINGS LIKE:
STORIED TRADITION, NATIONAL BRAND, REPUTATION, PERCEIVED PERCEPTION OF, CLOUT, INFLUENCE, MARKETING, BOWLS, NY6 JANUARY BOWLS, CFP, RECORD, SUCCESS, FAN ATTENDANCE, TV NUMBERS, ETC, ALL COMBINED TOGETHER, AND NOT JUST ONLY ONE OF THOSE FACTORS BY ITSELF.
Yeah 95, you have the understanding and reading comprehension of a 2nd grader. Buck up! This is likely why Mik has to repeat the same exact thing over and over and over again so you will understand it. Like those bolded words above which are repeated from the post before.
And clearly you (and maybe I) are not tuned into what "They" use like our friend Mik is. Wish we could be flies on the wall as "They" chat about these things.
Last edited:
I would have to keep UNM. They've had the bad luck UNLV has had with football coaches. UNLV was fortunate, ie. damn lucky, to get Barry Odom who quickly turned things around last season. UNM just hired Bronco Mendenhall. Mendenhall is a good coach. Former HC at BYU and Virginia who retired with a winning overall record. If he can turn things around at NM we all benefit.
That plus UNM basketball. One thing about UNM is that their fans travel for basketball. They remind me of WSU in terms of how well you travel for football. The MWC Tournament championship game was packed with UNM fans. They may have had the most fans of any MWC school.
UNM's women's basketball is usually pretty good. In a MWC with some of the worst women's teams you see in most conferences UNM is better than most. Not as good as UNLV but with WSU and OSU women's basketball I would say that OSU, UNLV, WSU, and UNM will stand out from the rest.
Those are my reasons for keeping UNM. I'm okay with tossing the rest in that highlighted list above. AF football is pretty good though.
New Mexico... as an Oregon Stater, I know who Bronco Mendenhall is! He was a JC transfer who played for the Beavers and then started his coaching career at OSU. Coached under the Beavers defensive coordinator named Rocky Long, who later was the head coach at New Mexico (1998 - 2008) and San Diego State U. Mendenhall has applied for the Beaver head coaching job at least once, and I was very disappointed he didn't get it.
If I'm not mistaken, New Mexico has good academics. But New Mexico has 2.1 million people, so the state probably doesn't bring much of a TV audience or is a good recruiting area.
That said... no more than 6 G5 schools to rebuild the conference. We don't want to turn the PAC-12 into any more of a G5 conference than we have to. Schools invited should meet these criteria:
* Located on west coast to minimize travel
* Located in a good population area for TV viewership purposes
* Located in a good population area for recruiting purposes
* Has the ability to eventually fund an athletic department at the Power 4 (Power 5) level
The schools listed in the CANZANO RUMOR generally meet these criteria (Boise St, Colorado St., Fresno St, San Diego St., and UNLV).
New Mexico, Wyoming, and Utah are generally areas that the Beavers don't recruit. Why give those schools any more recruiting exposure in California (+ Oregon + Washington) than we have to?
If I'm not mistaken, New Mexico has good academics. But New Mexico has 2.1 million people, so the state probably doesn't bring much of a TV audience or is a good recruiting area.
That said... no more than 6 G5 schools to rebuild the conference. We don't want to turn the PAC-12 into any more of a G5 conference than we have to. Schools invited should meet these criteria:
* Located on west coast to minimize travel
* Located in a good population area for TV viewership purposes
* Located in a good population area for recruiting purposes
* Has the ability to eventually fund an athletic department at the Power 4 (Power 5) level
The schools listed in the CANZANO RUMOR generally meet these criteria (Boise St, Colorado St., Fresno St, San Diego St., and UNLV).
New Mexico, Wyoming, and Utah are generally areas that the Beavers don't recruit. Why give those schools any more recruiting exposure in California (+ Oregon + Washington) than we have to?
Last edited:
I’d hate to lose Air Force. I’m kind of hoping that our new league forms a scheduling agreement with another G5 conference so we can have Army, Navy, and Air Force all in the same pool.
You’re mostly right. I ignore most of your messages because they’re so full of incomprehensible drivel, and on the rare occasion they’re understandable, they’re somewhere between ridiculous and stupid. Or both.
As for your notion that teams got picked because of their history and tradition…you’re wrong again. Those things only matter to the degree that they mean people watch those teams on TV. That’s the only thing the networks care about.
