A new and better FBS thread

[abc123]

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.

[NDSU92]

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...

[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.

[NDSU92]

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...

[MWC]

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..

[abc123]

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.

[taper]

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.

[NDSU92]

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.

[NDSU92]

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.

[taper]

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.