Printable View
I can tell you in DFW they move the needle about the same, which is barely at all. Not one person here who isn’t an alumnus is turning on the game if there’s remotely anything else they could be doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by TAILG8R
Frankly on the Dallas side of DFW when I tell people I went to NDSU about half of adult men make the “man you guys are in Frisco every year” comment. So NDSU honestly may have more name recognition than Texas State.
I am as casual a fan as you will ever see. I saw about 5 or 10 minutes of one of your games a few years back. I don't know much about UTSA other than they, along with Texas State, took the place in the WAC when Fresno and NV left for the MW. Nevada has played Texas State a couple of times.
We do have some good insiders on the Nevada message board who do provide some good scoopage.
When in the WAC they shared the conference with Utah St and San Jose State.
Right, wrong or indifferent, the perception of what a Texas school offers for recruitment for athletes and students is greater than what Montana or North Dakota offers in "media".Quote:
Originally Posted by Twentysix
There isn't a good fix for geography. But conferences clearly make decisions based on very random factors depending on differing circumstances and how desperate they are.
Definitely. Only thing that would make it worse is if they were called Texas State University Stephenville. They’d probably be in the B12 by now.Quote:
Originally Posted by abc123
I cannot describe how little people care about any school below SEC or B12. SMU gets about as much following in DFW as NDSU does in Minneapolis.
I would say the pecking order on the Dallas side of DFW is as follows. It really is college football Mecca.
TAMU
UT
TTU
Baylor
Houston
SMU
TCU
The Oklahoma schools
The rest of the SEC
The rest of the B12
Rice
UNT
Texas State
UTSA
…probably forgetting some…
UTEP
Sammy
Media market essentially means nothing here because it’s national games only on local channels. The thought of anyone other than TAMU, UT, or TTU ever being on local channel is completely laughable. I have lived in Texas for 10 years and never heard one person say “Tarleton State” or “stephenville” out loud.
I' pretty confident that they will make these choices based only on what benefits the conference the most. Hopefully Mr Larson has some salesmanship in him because he needs to convince MWC or PAC that inviting NDSU has significant upside for their conference. Our pitch obviously should be football driven, yet still pointing out what our vision is for all of our sports in this new environment, why Fargo is ready to support us in this move, that our fans are excited to shift loyalties to a new conference and won't be stuck in the past & proof that we have a plan to make this work to assure them that they will be getting quality participation long term.Quote:
Originally Posted by abc123
Anything that translates to a benefit for them is all they care about.
Bigger conferences seem to REALLY want to have a presence in Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by NDSU92
That top tier has been claimed by the P4, so now there is a scramble over the second tier: Rice, UNT, Texas St, UTSA.
Rice seems to be largely ignored, perhaps because they haven't been that successful in recent years. The buzz is around UNT, Texas St, and UTSA.
Those 3 schools will have interest from some combination of PAC, AAC, and MWC. I just don't see any of them moving to MWC over AAC, SBC or PAC. PAC is likely to get who they want in Texas, then AAC will most likely get/keep who they choose.
While the whole "media market" thing is flawed, it is unfortunately still a big factor in conference invites. The entire media industry operates off of DMAs and where you lie geographically. Perhaps that will shift in time as people move to streaming and ESPN and others can more accurately track viewership.
I could be naive but I don't think AFA wants to pay a large exit fee to go to a depleted AAC. They play Army and Navy ooc every year anyway. UNLV is carrying heavy debt and attracts the smallest amount of tv viewers in the MW. Those are two reasons the PAC passed. Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe Memphis, Tulane and USF decide to stay in the AAC. That could certainly change the dynamic. It is possible that the MW will stay lean and regional by adding UTEP only. I don't see any real reason to spread out all over. I do believe the MWC will get about the same amount for their tv deal and splitting that pie by 9 instead of 12 helps cover some slack. Plus! Over 111 million dollars coming from the Pac and the defectors greases the wheels considerably.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHorns
I just don’t see AFA leaving to go cross country all year long and I don’t see the non-service academies voting to include a school way out west that brings nothing to the conference except making two football only members happy. Half the schools in the AAC are in states that touch the Atlantic and I’m telling AFA to pound sand if I’m them.Quote:
Originally Posted by MWC
I don’t see the pac luring away schools from the AAC. Not without at least doubling their conference payout. And they won’t know what that is until they’re a legit conference again. PAC has to take two from MW (or elsewhere…) and MW will have to backfill.
Another development now too is that all the conferences are now making their members sign GoRs that are almost prohibitive in their own right. If CUSA schools’ end goal is the Sun Belt or AAC, are they signing on to the MW knowing it probably takes them further from a future invite to those conferences? Same goes for MW schools potentially moving to the AAC or AAC schools moving to the PAC. Any moves now lock you into a conference for a while - you better make sure you don’t regret committing to something lesser than your end goal.
Sports are the front porch (see: Chapman). He was correct; they are for alumni connection and student recruiting.
Given the available students to recruit, the Dakotas will always be at disadvantage to Texas and Calilfornia.
Its not clear to me how badly AAC wants AFA, or vice versa, but clearly those conversations happened in the past and are happening again. I'm not sure its a great fit geographically, but could be good for the American brand to have all 3 service academies.Quote:
Originally Posted by MWC
Find it hard to believe that the MWC TV deal won't take a hit given the departure of their top 4 schools. Perhaps with inflation factored in, the media companies will agree to just keep it the same as before. Typically you would expect more schools to equal a higher media payout, because that provides more content and markets. But if adding more schools dilutes the payout to where existing members make less, obviously that can change how they view things.
Like all FBS reshuffles, this will come down to the money. The media companies control the money, and thus where everyone lands.