A new and better FBS thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

All of those schools spent time in a conference that hasn't sponsored football for 17 years..Most of these school knew in advance that football was likely to end soon. Boise and NV, in particular, saw this as the opportunity to move up despite the fact the whole thing was obviously collapsing.

You folks here are quite confident that your school is upper level G5 caliber now.

I am not advocating for you to join CUSA but no matter where you go, the good programs eventually get better opportunities. If you are as great as you claim, CUSA is not a dead end..It is a bridge.

Either you believe you are destined for the big time or you don't..

---

Lol worked out for Idaho. And NDSU obviously has fewer connections with MWC schools than Idaho did.

CUSA in its current state is not a better place for NDSU than the MVFC/Summit. Maybe someday it will be, but there's more urgency on CUSA to get itself to proven viability than there is urgency on NDSU to accept an offer to a conference that is all but DOA at FBS. We'd be lucky to land back in the MVFC with our program intact. Very hard to recover from that, just ask Idaho. I'd rather convince the top halves of MVFC and Big Sky to move up together and just call ourselves FBS. That might be what happens anyways.

Thinking NDSU would be a strong G5 program is not the same thing as thinking NDSU should throw their lot in with just whoever. In fact, SHSU, JSU and whoever else probably joined CUSA because they aren't confident they're going to be a strong G5 program.

NDSU does NOT belong in FCS since 2013. it's beyond time to end this charade & do whatever it takes to get into the mountain west. make some backroom deals, send hookers, anything FFS

https://www.inforum.com/sports/bison...-into-nil-pool

Damn straight. Don’t wait on this. If I’m not mistaken, the Shocker AD got fired because he didn’t take NIL seriously. NDSU needs to be on this yesterday

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daddy daycare

CUSA would be falling off the ladder and might even be worse off in 2 years.

---

Better than living in the sewer that is FCS football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

https://www.inforum.com/sports/bison...-into-nil-pool

Damn straight. Don’t wait on this. If I’m not mistaken, the Shocker AD got fired because he didn’t take NIL seriously. NDSU needs to be on this yesterday

---

Teams that sit back on NIL will become NAIA quality teams. No reason we can't be one of the top mid major teams

This is the equivalent to D2 dropping scholarship numbers back in the 90s and suddenly we weren't as talented.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSUstudent

Better than living in the sewer that is FCS football.

---

hahah...uh....no. And there is zero future for that conference. But you do you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El_Chapo

NDSU does NOT belong in FCS since 2013. it's beyond time to end this charade & do whatever it takes to get into the mountain west. make some backroom deals, send hookers, anything FFS

---

What's the deal? Hey we have not much to offer your conference in all sports. Take us in and make your conference an odd number.

What a great deal for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daddy daycare

What's the deal? Hey we have not much to offer your conference in all sports. Take us in and make your conference an odd number.

What a great deal for them.

---

we have a lot to offer. especially in All Sports. NDSU would dominate these regional pud schools in Recrutiing for baseball track soccer softball volleyball. PLUS we could use UNI SDSU usd und Montanas as our minor leagues and pluck 1-2 top players per year off or them

a chance to say you are FBS & play Power 5 teams in OOC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El_Chapo

we have a lot to offer. especially in All Sports. NDSU would dominate these regional pud schools in Recrutiing for baseball track soccer softball volleyball. PLUS we could use UNI SDSU usd und Montanas as our minor leagues and pluck 1-2 top players per year off or them

a chance to say you are FBS & play Power 5 teams in OOC.

---

MWC doesn't give a shit about any of that. In particular the final sentence.

I would think now more than ever the MWC cares about stability. Which school(s) do they believe can give them that longish term? Who knows.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAILG8R

I would think now more than ever the MWC cares about stability. Which school(s) do they believe can give them that longish term? Who knows.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

---

What’s the reason for them to change anything as of right now? if they lose zero schools they’re in great shape when the G5 is split from the P5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daddy daycare

What’s the reason for them to change anything as of right now? if they lose zero schools they’re in great shape when the G5 is split from the P5.

---

Yeah the MW has little if any benefit to adding us and Montana currently. If they lose Boise and SDSU (or anyone else), they would have some major reasons to add us and Montana.

I don't know much, but I think that as it currently sits we don't have much chance getting into the MW unless something crazy happens. However, if they lose two schools, I'd say the chances are pretty good we're in the MW within a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Yeah the MW has little if any benefit to adding us and Montana currently. If they lose Boise and SDSU (or anyone else), they would have some major reasons to add us and Montana.

I don't know much, but I think that as it currently sits we don't have much chance getting into the MW unless something crazy happens. However, if they lose two schools, I'd say the chances are pretty good we're in the MW within a year.

---

Is your percentage on “pretty good” greater than 50%?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Yeah the MW has little if any benefit to adding us and Montana currently. If they lose Boise and SDSU (or anyone else), they would have some major reasons to add us and Montana.

I don't know much, but I think that as it currently sits we don't have much chance getting into the MW unless something crazy happens. However, if they lose two schools, I'd say the chances are pretty good we're in the MW within a year.

---

I don't think Montana is going anywhere without Montana State. That's a problem for NDSU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grizzled

Is your percentage on “pretty good” greater than 50%?

---

I'd say 51%. There's still a decent chance that the MW doesn't immediately replace and chooses to wait out the next dominoes to fall. There's also a much smaller chance that they take NMSU and UTEP instead (moves which don't bring them any new geographic areas, don't bring them competitive programs, and would in a best case scenario instead compete for eyeballs with an existing conference mate).

Add the Grizz and NDSU, and the Mountain West has first dibs on every football-loving eyeball from Missoula to Fergus Falls and probably down to Pierre even. That's a hell of a market capture without any significant competitors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daddy daycare

I don't think Montana is going anywhere without Montana State. That's a problem for NDSU.

---

Yeah, admittedly I don't know Montana politics. I guess I assumed that if NDSU can break through ND Legislature without UND, Montana would be able to do the same. I guess Montana State doesn't have a "teh hockies" pillow to grab and make themselves feel better about their rival leaving them in the dust...

Montana has an intense rivalry with MSU, but the feeling they would have about NDSU leaving them in the dust would be enough to motivate them leaving MSU in the dust themselves. Sell it to the legislature that these are crazy times and Montana getting their foot in the door is a future foot in the door for Montana State and they're good to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

I'd say 51%. There's still a decent chance that the MW doesn't immediately replace and chooses to wait out the next dominoes to fall. There's also a much smaller chance that they take NMSU and UTEP instead (moves which don't bring them any new geographic areas, don't bring them competitive programs, and would in a best case scenario instead compete for eyeballs with an existing conference mate).

Add the Grizz and NDSU, and the Mountain West has first dibs on every football-loving eyeball from Missoula to Fergus Falls and probably down to Pierre even. That's a hell of a market capture without any significant competitors.

---

Not saying that NMSU and UTEP would be high on the MWC radar, but as a conference that is fairly tight-knight (or as close as you can get in the western US), not over expanding their footprint may actually be the preference. You have bulit in travel partners an hour apart. That could be attractive when looking at expenses if the conference is losing two of their bigger "name-brands", which will have negative impact on any media contracts.
And while El Paso is right on the TX/NM border, it would still allow them to dip their toes into Texas, which continues to be attractive for conferences.
Hypothetically picking up a bunch of land (which encompasses plenty of fans of other schools and non-fans) isn't going to move the needle outside of increasing travel costs. The amount of eyeballs (which is what actually matters) in that vast land capture isn't all that big. While El Paso-Las Cruses CSA isn't huge, it is still about 1.1 million.

Plenty of uncertainty, and who knows what will actually shake out. All I would say is that it is a pretty big stretch to guess that there's a 51% chance of anything specifically happening if 2 other schools leave and is nothing but wishful thinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Yeah, admittedly I don't know Montana politics. I guess I assumed that if NDSU can break through ND Legislature without UND, Montana would be able to do the same. I guess Montana State doesn't have a "teh hockies" pillow to grab and make themselves feel better about their rival leaving them in the dust...

Montana has an intense rivalry with MSU, but the feeling they would have about NDSU leaving them in the dust would be enough to motivate them leaving MSU in the dust themselves. Sell it to the legislature that these are crazy times and Montana getting their foot in the door is a future foot in the door for Montana State and they're good to go.

---

I've always read they're a package deal BUUUTTTTTTT....the internet could be wrong lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc123

Not saying that NMSU and UTEP would be high on the MWC radar, but as a conference that is fairly tight-knight (or as close as you can get in the western US), not over expanding their footprint may actually be the preference. You have bulit in travel partners an hour apart. That could be attractive when looking at expenses if the conference is losing two of their bigger "name-brands", which will have negative impact on any media contracts.
And while El Paso is right on the TX/NM border, it would still allow them to dip their toes into Texas, which continues to be attractive for conferences.
Hypothetically picking up a bunch of land (which encompasses plenty of fans of other schools and non-fans) isn't going to move the needle outside of increasing travel costs. The amount of eyeballs (which is what actually matters) in that vast land capture isn't all that big. While El Paso-Las Cruses CSA isn't huge, it is still about 1.1 million.

Plenty of uncertainty, and who knows what will actually shake out. All I would say is that it is a pretty big stretch to guess that there's a 51% chance of anything specifically happening if 2 other schools leave and is nothing but wishful thinking.

---

Sure travel is easier, but that's really not a reason to take them in. That argument hasn't worked for those schools in the past. UTEP has 1.1M in their metro and they still can't find more than 15k to their football games. Again, because everyone in El Paso has at least one bigger and better school that they're actual fans of, opposed to NDSU and Montana. As far as the "Texas" argument, Kansas City is closer to the major Texas population centers than El Paso.

What actually matters is how many people will actually tune into your games. More people watch NDSU football games when they are on broadcast television than UTEP and NM State combined. The biggest strength isn't the size of the land, it's the lack of competition. What does adding NMSU and UTEP get you? The remaining quarter of New Mexicans that aren't UNM fans and the 5% of El Paso that cares about UTEP instead of Texas Tech? To your point, the biggest concern is how to replace their two largest money makers for the TV deal. I doubt the commissioner's grand plan includes replacing them with UTEP and NMSU.

Not sure you guys are looking at the right Montana school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Sure travel is easier, but that's really not a reason to take them in. That argument hasn't worked for those schools in the past. UTEP has 1.1M in their metro and they still can't find more than 15k to their football games. Again, because everyone in El Paso has at least one bigger and better school that they're actual fans of, opposed to NDSU and Montana. As far as the "Texas" argument, Kansas City is closer to the major Texas population centers than El Paso.

What actually matters is how many people will actually tune into your games.. More people watch NDSU football games when they are on broadcast television than UTEP and NM State combined. The biggest strength isn't the size of the land, it's the lack of competition. What does adding NMSU and UTEP get you? The remaining quarter of New Mexicans that aren't UNM fans and the 5% of El Paso that cares about UTEP instead of Texas Tech? To your point, the biggest concern is how to replace their two largest money makers for the TV deal. I doubt the commissioner's grand plan includes replacing them with UTEP and NMSU.

---

That's why the B1G wanted Rutgers and Maryland so bad right?
When was the MWC looking for additional members that UTEP and NMSU were on the table?
And in no world would NDSU and Montana even going to come close to replacing Boise and SDSU (in your hypothetical scenario), which is why there is absolutely a reason the MWC takes a long hard look at the expense side of the equation and figures out how to manage that as well. Again, I don't even think either is likely but it is definitely just as likely to be table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc123

That's why the B1G wanted Rutgers and Maryland so bad right?

---

That was the thinking 8 years ago. As many conference commissioners, including Craig Thompson have said recently, that thinking was a mistake and doesn't actually provide much benefit if you don't have the brand and viewership to back it up.

B10 commissioner Delaney was asked back in 2017 if he regretted bringing in Maryland and Rutgers, as it's now known by everyone that it was a bad decision. His response was "I don't think I'd put Rutgers and Maryland in the same competitive category". A complete sidestep...

I would say there is a zero percent chance the MW will add any schools, even if 2 leave until 2026*. I would put it as a 10 percent chance that they would add after that. The conference is not imploding..They have lived through defections before.

They have 12 members now but big is not necessarily better.

They would add if it got down to 8 football and 7 OLY sports. They did that when Boise and SDSU left before. If the same two schools leave now, as described in the above scenario, the MW would still have 10 and 9. That is a perfectly viable number.

The current tv deal represents less than 10 percent of the revenue for almost all the MW schools. I think the new deal negotiated in 2026 would likely be about the same pay out per school because it is based more on PST slots than it is on population.

I believe all FBS conferences will take their football out of the NCAA.

* The MW would add Oregon State and Washing ton State immediately in the unlikely event they are available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

I would say there is a zero percent chance the MW will add any schools, even if 2 leave until 2026*. I would put it as a 10 percent chance that they would add after that. The conference is not imploding..They have lived through defections before.

They have 12 members now but big is not necessarily better.

They would add if it got down to 8 football and 7 OLY sports. They did that when Boise and SDSU left before. If the same two schools leave now, as described in the above scenario, the MW would still have 10 and 9. That is a perfectly viable number.

The current tv deal represents less than 10 percent of the revenue for almost all the MW schools. I think the new deal negotiated in 2026 would likely be about the same pay out per school because it is based more on PST slots than it is on population.

I believe all FBS conferences will take their football out of the NCAA.

* The MW would add Oregon State and Washing ton State immediately in the unlikely event they are available.

---

In that case, the MW better hope the B12 and/or PAC stay out of Colorado... :)

I have no problem with schools getting poached by P5..They get a hat tip from me. Nevada has jumped ship to a better conference gig 3 times over the last 30 year. There is nothing wrong with ambition.

The conference you are in doesn't make you attractive to other conferences..Lots of factors play a role but it is up to the individual schools to prepare themselves for opportunities should opportunities arise..

The MW will be fine..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

That was the thinking 8 years ago. As many conference commissioners, including Craig Thompson have said recently, that thinking was a mistake and doesn't actually provide much benefit if you don't have the brand and viewership to back it up.

B10 commissioner Delaney was asked back in 2017 if he regretted bringing in Maryland and Rutgers, as it's now known by everyone that it was a bad decision. His response was "I don't think I'd put Rutgers and Maryland in the same competitive category". A complete sidestep...

---

And based on the amount of households that the B1G Network is now in on the east coast (and thus additions to the already huge media contract they have), they would do it all over again. No one actually thought that they were being added for competitive reasons. And anyone who said that didn't keep a straight-face when doing it.

I'll agree that the MWC and B1G operate in two completely separate universes. But that also comes with the realization that the amount of eyeballs you're talking about with "fans" isn't going to move the needle all that much regardless. And as was just mentioned, part of the allure of the MWC for media contracts is filling in those later TV time slots. Something that adding a team located in CST doesn't help a whole lot with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ByeSonBusiness

Not sure you guys are looking at the right Montana school.

---

Remember that "you guys" only refers to a single FBS or Bust member that's been lurching from fantasy to fantasy trying to find something that sticks. I agree that right now Montana St is clearly a better add than Montana, but they're almost certainly a pair, and a pair that hasn't shown any interest in FBS. To paraphrase their positions back when the WAC was courting them in 2010, State told them to get lost and U said we're not going without State.
Even if the MWC loses 2 I can see them holding at 10 for the time being. If they lose more then would shouldn't ignore a raid of the Big West. Even if none want to start FBS football, there's still some highly respected institutions there. My biggest gripe about this thread is how football centric it is, while conference membership is clearly so much more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc123

And based on the amount of households that the B1G Network is now in on the east coast (and thus additions to the already huge media contract they have), they would do it all over again. No one actually thought that they were being added for competitive reasons. And anyone who said that didn't keep a straight-face when doing it.

I'll agree that the MWC and B1G operate in two completely separate universes. But that also comes with the realization that the amount of eyeballs you're talking about with "fans" isn't going to move the needle all that much regardless. And as was just mentioned, part of the allure of the MWC for media contracts is filling in those later TV time slots. Something that adding a team located in CST doesn't help a whole lot with.

---

Right, exactly my point. How many more households will the MW be in if they add UTEP and NM State? This has been my entire point. It adds 0 eyeballs. They're already on TV in those markets.

NDSU isn't ideally placed for the MW, that's not news to anyone. But in the case that they are trying to add, my argument is that they have a very high floor and probably the highest ceiling of their options. Certainly better than UTEP and NMSU. All I'm saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taper

Remember that "you guys" only refers to a single FBS or Bust member that's been lurching from fantasy to fantasy trying to find something that sticks. I agree that right now Montana St is clearly a better add than Montana, but they're almost certainly a pair, and a pair that hasn't shown any interest in FBS. To paraphrase their positions back when the WAC was courting them in 2010, State told them to get lost and U said we're not going without State.
Even if the MWC loses 2 I can see them holding at 10 for the time being. If they lose more then would shouldn't ignore a raid of the Big West. Even if none want to start FBS football, there's still some highly respected institutions there. My biggest gripe about this thread is how football centric it is, while conference membership is clearly so much more.

---

Remember that pretty much everyone who's talking FBS around NDSU right now is talking MW. The situation changes and the speculation changes with it. What people said in 2010 is about as relevant as the moon landing at this point.

Regarding Montana State. Would y'all feel differently if it were Montana in the championship last year instead of Montana State? Remember we're not too far off from a Montana State head coach whining about lack of resources and then bailing on the program to coach linebackers at Texas. All of this in Bozeman aka Little California. Doesn't seem like they're exactly geared for a move up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Remember that pretty much everyone who's talking FBS around NDSU right now is talking MW. The situation changes and the speculation changes with it. What people said in 2010 is about as relevant as the moon landing at this point.

Regarding Montana State. Would y'all feel differently if it were Montana in the championship last year instead of Montana State? Remember we're not too far off from a Montana State head coach whining about lack of resources and then bailing on the program to coach linebackers at Texas. All of this in Bozeman aka Little California. Doesn't seem like they're exactly geared for a move up.

---

There you go thinking only about football again. MSU has over 50% higher enrollment and a substantially better basketball program. Football is effectively a wash between the 2, but it's a moot point since neither will go without the other.

Also, FANS are talking about going to the MWC because all the other G5 have already passed on us. There's been absolutely no indication the MWC has looked at us seriously. Echo chambers are dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Right, exactly my point. How many more households will the MW be in if they add UTEP and NM State? This has been my entire point. It adds 0 eyeballs. They're already on TV in those markets.

NDSU isn't ideally placed for the MW, that's not news to anyone. But in the case that they are trying to add, my argument is that they have a very high floor and probably the highest ceiling of their options. Certainly better than UTEP and NMSU. All I'm saying.

---

According to you, it is about the fans and the brand, so the MWC has none of the NMSU and UTEP eyeballs right now. Would they add less than UM/NDSU? Very possible in the grand scheme of things. But NMSU does bring a pretty damn good basketball brand with them.
Either way, the MWC media contract would not be significantly different if they added NMSU/UTEP or UM/NDSU (or MSU).
In the event they do need to add, at least one of the options keeps a tight footprint and has cost lower for travel, plus adds some regional rivalries. Not saying that makes it more or less likely, but pretending its better than a coinflip is just silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taper

There you go thinking only about football again. MSU has over 50% higher enrollment and a substantially better basketball program. Football is effectively a wash between the 2, but it's a moot point since neither will go without the other.

Also, FANS are talking about going to the MWC because all the other G5 have already passed on us. There's been absolutely no indication the MWC has looked at us seriously. Echo chambers are dangerous.

---

What sport drives the bus? Conference realignment at D1 is not being driven by non-football sports. The MW may be shifting some more focus to bball. That doesn't mean football is taking a back seat to it. Weber has a higher enrollment and better basketball than the Montanas and is better located than any school mentioned in this thread. Should they get looked at? No, because the big money-making sport for the conference doesn't make any money at Weber.

You hear what you want to hear and then argue against words you put in peoples' mouths. I know the MW isn't looking at us right now, I've never said that they are. I've said that IF they were looking at schools, likely as a result of losing current members, NDSU could and should be one of the first places they look. This is an NDSU fan site in a thread where people speculate about conference realignment. What is your expectation of what you're going to read in here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc123

According to you, it is about the fans and the brand, so the MWC has none of the NMSU and UTEP eyeballs right now. Would they add less than UM/NDSU? Very possible in the grand scheme of things. But NMSU does bring a pretty damn good basketball brand with them.
Either way, the MWC media contract would not be significantly different if they added NMSU/UTEP or UM/NDSU (or MSU).
In the event they do need to add, at least one of the options keeps a tight footprint and has cost lower for travel, plus adds some regional rivalries. Not saying that makes it more or less likely, but pretending its better than a coinflip is just silly.

---

So NDSU/Montana has UTEP/NMSU beat in both the points you're trying to make and the points I'm trying to make. Nice.

You do have a point about the travel between NMSU and UTEP. Although the MW has had many opportunities to add them in the past and I don't think they've gotten a sniff either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

What sport drives the bus? Conference realignment at D1 is not being driven by non-football sports. The MW may be shifting some more focus to bball. That doesn't mean football is taking a back seat to it. Weber has a higher enrollment and better basketball than the Montanas and is better located than any school mentioned in this thread. Should they get looked at? No, because the big money-making sport for the conference doesn't make any money at Weber.

You hear what you want to hear and then argue against words you put in peoples' mouths. I know the MW isn't looking at us right now, I've never said that they are. I've said that IF they were looking at schools, likely as a result of losing current members, NDSU could and should be one of the first places they look. This is an NDSU fan site in a thread where people speculate about conference realignment. What is your expectation of what you're going to read in here?

---

Montana is the dying University in the state, and MSU is the thriving university. Swap the football programs and it is a no brainer but I would dare to say MSU is better suited right now to move to the FBS than Montana. All Montana has going for it is it has a historically successful football program which won’t carry the university as far as you think. We all need to check out football centrist views because a good football program is not the only thing conferences look at!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daddy daycare

What’s the reason for them to change anything as of right now? if they lose zero schools they’re in great shape when the G5 is split from the P5.

---

My point was that they are obviously very aware of the changes that have been happening in realignment and they are absolutely thinking about stability moving forward and if and when there is more shake up how they are going to react to that shake up. You think they don't have a draft board type plan for each scenario they can dream up? I wasn't saying they are actively recruiting new schools at this moment.

There are so many things out of your control that would have to break your way for NDSU to be invited to the MW. That is also the case for other schools that have sought an invitation as well.

The big boys will do their merry go round stuff and we will have to see how that effects the MW. The MW doesn't control any of that.

We just have to see how this round of conference jumping plays out before any decisions can be made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El_Chapo

we have a lot to offer. especially in All Sports. NDSU would dominate these regional pud schools in Recrutiing for baseball track soccer softball volleyball. PLUS we could use UNI SDSU usd und Montanas as our minor leagues and pluck 1-2 top players per year off or them

a chance to say you are FBS & play Power 5 teams in OOC.

---

usd? Did you OK that with Yote53?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

There are so many things out of your control that would have to break your way for NDSU to be invited to the MW. That is also the case for other schools that have sought an invitation as well.

The big boys will do their merry go round stuff and we will have to see how that effects the MW. The MW doesn't control any of that.

We just have to see how this round of conference jumping plays out before any decisions can be made.

---

MWC - Do you think the reason the Mountain West is content standing pat even if they lose two team is because of money? I thought the last rights deal was something like 4 million per team. If that’s true just let the original members keep the exit fees and charge NDSU an entry fee to stop member dilution during the current deal. I would think all bets would be off for the next deal if the San Diego market is moved into the PAC 10.

In a very selfish way I would like to how NDSU would do for ratings in the late game FS2 slot in the MSP market. Assuming the Gophers play at 11:00,per usual, the metros closest G5 program is probably Norrhern Ill. Seems like a second program with alumni and proximity could value add.

I don't think it is just about money. The conference got to 12 by accident. The conference came into being as a direct result of the WAC 16 experiment. Bigger isn't always better and in MW history not the key to stability either. I would guess even minus SDSU the tv deal would be about the same..It is not as contingent on population as it is by time zone tv slots.

It should be noted that for almost every MW school, the tv deal represents less than 10 percent of their revenue. The conference works because of long time rivalries and regionality.

The MW could well lose a couple schools but there is still a lot of schools who will be sticking around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

I don't think it is just about money. The conference got to 12 by accident. The conference came into being as a direct result of the WAC 16 experiment. Bigger isn't always better and in MW history not the key to stability either. I would guess even minus SDSU the tv deal would be about the same..It is not as contingent on population as it is by time zone tv slots.

It should be noted that for almost every MW school, the tv deal represents less than 10 percent of their revenue. The conference works because of long time rivalries and regionality.

The MW could well lose a couple schools but there is still a lot of schools who will be sticking around.

---

The rivalry part is what I don’t understand, adding say Montana, MSU, and NDSU you would get peer academic schools that would make the conference stronger, at least from a football perspective. Might sound kind of old school but adding schools that would fill their stadiums is a good thing, but watching the MAC and what’s left of the AAC, gross, half full at best.