Potential no mw

Harcher · Post by **Harcher** » August 6th, 2023, 8:56 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.

If your premise is true (all the cards) then the mwc could offer a 72 hr plan. AND if they don’t like it THEN there is no loss to MWC.

I don’t think premise is true.
If you get cal and Stanford to join (and wsu and OSU), there can be a revenue increase. Therefore, where is your negotiating stop point?

Many here said “max out what is best for you”.

We have a thread on “least valuable”. Why would that be relevant if MWC holds ALL the cards?
Would USU give up a million or so in equal split to get double revenue?

Cal and Stanford might have other options… so what do you do to get them to come and be part of your group?

It starts with the revenue increase they bring.

BYW I’m not “already conceding” the points above, I’m asking what you all think is that point. What do you think will be the discussion points ?

Aggie84025 · Post by **Aggie84025** » August 6th, 2023, 9:26 am

Harcher wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:56 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
If your premise is true (all the cards) then the mwc could offer a 72 hr plan. AND if they don’t like it THEN there is no loss to MWC.

I don’t think premise is true.
If you get cal and Stanford to join (and wsu and OSU), there can be a revenue increase. Therefore, where is your negotiating stop point?

Many here said “max out what is best for you”.

We have a thread on “least valuable”. Why would that be relevant if MWC holds ALL the cards?
Would USU give up a million or so in equal split to get double revenue?

Cal and Stanford might have other options… so what do you do to get them to come and be part of your group?

It starts with the revenue increase they bring.

BYW I’m not “already conceding” the points above, I’m asking what you all think is that point. What do you think will be the discussion points ?

I honestly don't think Cal/Stanford have a lot of options especially Cal. Both of them need to have a football conference or go independent for football. Cal cannot afford to go the independent route so they need to find a home for at least football. Newsflash the Big12, Big 10 and Sec are not making that phone call to them. I guess it is possible they get invited to the ACC but that would be a disaster from a travel/costs standpoint.

AgSpaceCase · Post by **AgSpaceCase** » August 6th, 2023, 9:27 am

I think we need to step back and remember the MW and PAC4 are not going to talking money at conference destruction levels.

When USCLA left the PAC they went from 20ish million to approx 70 million. Utah is jumping to get to nearly 40 million. That is 50% or more of their overall athletics budgets.

This years conference distribution was in total 6.6 million. Which is a small portion of the 40ish million budget. After changes we are at probably a 8-10 million per school deal if we keep everyone and just add a couple PAC schools. Dropping the supposed “dead weight” and having 7-9 schools join the PAC4 is not going to maintain the 20mil Apple bid. It’s gonna be only at most a couple million higher in the 10-12 million per school range. Not even enough to cover the extra legal costs for the guaranteed lawsuit that would be coming.

MW Conference destruction just ain’t happening.

2004AG · Post by **2004AG** » August 6th, 2023, 9:29 am

Aggieiester wrote:The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.

This is EXACTLY what I’ve been thinking. Why would we let four rump pac 12 schools dictate anything? The brand is dead. It’s no longer a p5 conference. They have nothing. Why in hell would they be calling any shots ?

If the MW bands together we call the the shots and we come out as the winners.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yossarian · Post by **Yossarian** » August 6th, 2023, 9:30 am

Aglicious wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:41 am

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:01 am

The Old Bull wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 11:38 pm

JFWAggie wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:38 pm

slcagg wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:25 pm
If this were to happen would usu be one of the 9

Read the thread here

Dissolving the conference would take nine votes, who would be the three left out? I don't think we would be one of them, but this idea has me feeling uncomfortable. I think it would come down to the following schools:

New Mexico
San Jose
Nevada
Utah State
Hawaii
Wyoming

New PAC 12
Washington State
Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
SDSU
CSU
Air Force
Utah State
UNLV
Boise State
Nevada
Fresno State

After looking at other conference members message boards and their lists of the 9 members who would make up the new conference our message board is the only place you will find Utah State on the merger list.

This is concerning…

SDSU fans are the most against us… also they are the least informed as many of them seem to think you can do it with a rule change which they claim only takes 9 votes. I suppose it’s possible but it seems unlikely you would have 9 vote rule at all if it only takes 6 votes to change that rule?
If you're looking at market share or viewership, USU and Wyoming should be very nervous.
Why does this keep getting spread as if it were gospel? USU is in the 4th largest media market in the MWC, WYO is dead last. USU's TV ratings are also some of the highest in the MWC. I'm not sure why this gets portrayed so differently than reality?

Because USU is sucking third teat in that market and is not even close to bringing in the same market share as the other two, which happen to be located in the two most populous counties of that market and get the lion's share of media attention. This is no secret.

2004AG · Post by **2004AG** » August 6th, 2023, 9:32 am

Harcher wrote:
Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
If your premise is true (all the cards) then the mwc could offer a 72 hr plan. AND if they don’t like it THEN there is no loss to MWC.

I don’t think premise is true.
If you get cal and Stanford to join (and wsu and OSU), there can be a revenue increase. Therefore, where is your negotiating stop point?

Many here said “max out what is best for you”.

We have a thread on “least valuable”. Why would that be relevant if MWC holds ALL the cards?
Would USU give up a million or so in equal split to get double revenue?

Cal and Stanford might have other options… so what do you do to get them to come and be part of your group?

It starts with the revenue increase they bring.

BYW I’m not “already conceding” the points above, I’m asking what you all think is that point. What do you think will be the discussion points ?

Cal and Stanford don’t have any options besides independence and that’s a horrible option.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aggie84025 · Post by **Aggie84025** » August 6th, 2023, 9:34 am

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:30 am

Aglicious wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:41 am

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:01 am

The Old Bull wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 11:38 pm

JFWAggie wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:38 pm

slcagg wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:25 pm
If this were to happen would usu be one of the 9

Read the thread here

Dissolving the conference would take nine votes, who would be the three left out? I don't think we would be one of them, but this idea has me feeling uncomfortable. I think it would come down to the following schools:

New Mexico
San Jose
Nevada
Utah State
Hawaii
Wyoming

New PAC 12
Washington State
Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
SDSU
CSU
Air Force
Utah State
UNLV
Boise State
Nevada
Fresno State

After looking at other conference members message boards and their lists of the 9 members who would make up the new conference our message board is the only place you will find Utah State on the merger list.

This is concerning…

SDSU fans are the most against us… also they are the least informed as many of them seem to think you can do it with a rule change which they claim only takes 9 votes. I suppose it’s possible but it seems unlikely you would have 9 vote rule at all if it only takes 6 votes to change that rule?
If you're looking at market share or viewership, USU and Wyoming should be very nervous.
Why does this keep getting spread as if it were gospel? USU is in the 4th largest media market in the MWC, WYO is dead last. USU's TV ratings are also some of the highest in the MWC. I'm not sure why this gets portrayed so differently than reality?
Because USU is sucking third teat in that market and is not even close to bringing in the same market share as the other two, which happen to be located in the two most populous counties of that market and get the lion's share of media attention. This is no secret.

We are certainly 3rd place in terms of owning the Utah market but even with that the Aggies pull in pretty good viewership compared to our conference mates.

SLB · Post by **SLB** » August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.

This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

SLB · Post by **SLB** » August 6th, 2023, 9:45 am

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:34 am

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:30 am

Aglicious wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:41 am

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:01 am

The Old Bull wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 11:38 pm

JFWAggie wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:38 pm

slcagg wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:25 pm
If this were to happen would usu be one of the 9

Read the thread here

Dissolving the conference would take nine votes, who would be the three left out? I don't think we would be one of them, but this idea has me feeling uncomfortable. I think it would come down to the following schools:

New Mexico
San Jose
Nevada
Utah State
Hawaii
Wyoming

New PAC 12
Washington State
Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
SDSU
CSU
Air Force
Utah State
UNLV
Boise State
Nevada
Fresno State

After looking at other conference members message boards and their lists of the 9 members who would make up the new conference our message board is the only place you will find Utah State on the merger list.

This is concerning…

SDSU fans are the most against us… also they are the least informed as many of them seem to think you can do it with a rule change which they claim only takes 9 votes. I suppose it’s possible but it seems unlikely you would have 9 vote rule at all if it only takes 6 votes to change that rule?
If you're looking at market share or viewership, USU and Wyoming should be very nervous.
Why does this keep getting spread as if it were gospel? USU is in the 4th largest media market in the MWC, WYO is dead last. USU's TV ratings are also some of the highest in the MWC. I'm not sure why this gets portrayed so differently than reality?
Because USU is sucking third teat in that market and is not even close to bringing in the same market share as the other two, which happen to be located in the two most populous counties of that market and get the lion's share of media attention. This is no secret.
We are certainly 3rd place in terms of owning the Utah market but even with that the Aggies pull in pretty good viewership compared to our conference mates.

Me and some others have talked about this for years.

WasatchAggie · Post by **WasatchAggie** » August 6th, 2023, 9:54 am

Some of you need to schedule an appointment with your therapist. The Aggies will be fine. We might not be the most watched school in our media market but that is true for almost all the members of our conference. With the trend for larger conferences and the uncertainty in college sports, artificially limiting the size of a merger is a non starter. The MWC will either add 2 or 4 schools. What we won't do is throw a school out.

coolag · Post by **coolag** » August 6th, 2023, 9:58 am

2004AG wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:29 am

Aggieiester wrote:The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
This is EXACTLY what I’ve been thinking. Why would we let four rump pac 12 schools dictate anything? The brand is dead. It’s no longer a p5 conference. They have nothing. Why in hell would they be calling any shots ?

If the MW bands together we call the the shots and we come out as the winners.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Never underestimate the whores SDSU and BSU and their tripping over themselves to get to the next $#@!

SLB · Post by **SLB** » August 6th, 2023, 10:00 am

TV rankings from above
41) Washington State 907 K
45) Cal 857 K
47) Stanford 846 K
57) Oregon State 625 K
64) Colorado State 386 K
66) Boise State 353 K
68) Air Force 326 K
69) Utah State 324 K
80) Fresno State 220K
83) San Diego State 196K
87) Wyoming 154K
90) Nevada 116.4 K
105) San Jose State 53K
108) Hawaii 43 K
113) New Mexico 17.5K
I would point out that ease of access does impact these numbers

NowhereLandAggie · Post by **NowhereLandAggie** » August 6th, 2023, 10:01 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.

The $20 million Apple TV deal was only a proposal and never signed. It is done and gone.

It was also a deal with Oregon and Washington in the conference with the other schools that also left. There is no big TV contract with the remaining PAC, in fact there is no TV contract whatsoever, that is why USC and UCLA originally left.

A merger will probably occur, lawyers are involved and I am sure SDSU's tournament credits and the remaining money from the PAC are looking for retention as this happens. I don't pretend to know all the legalities, but it is a lot more likely if both conferences agree.

Whatever happens, Gloria Nevarez better be in charge, and not George Kliavkoff.

2004AG · Post by **2004AG** » August 6th, 2023, 10:07 am

coolag wrote:
2004AG wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:29 am

Aggieiester wrote:The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
This is EXACTLY what I’ve been thinking. Why would we let four rump pac 12 schools dictate anything? The brand is dead. It’s no longer a p5 conference. They have nothing. Why in hell would they be calling any shots ?

If the MW bands together we call the the shots and we come out as the winners.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Never underestimate the whores SDSU and BSU and their tripping over themselves to get to the next $#@!

They are idiots but it would take more than those two to screw this up completely.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dogie · Post by **dogie** » August 6th, 2023, 10:08 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 10:00 am
TV rankings from above
41) Washington State 907 K
45) Cal 857 K
47) Stanford 846 K
57) Oregon State 625 K
64) Colorado State 386 K
66) Boise State 353 K
68) Air Force 326 K
69) Utah State 324 K
80) Fresno State 220K
83) San Diego State 196K
87) Wyoming 154K
90) Nevada 116.4 K
105) San Jose State 53K
108) Hawaii 43 K
113) New Mexico 17.5K
I would point out that ease of access does impact these numbers

17,500 is about what UNM averages for home attendance. And, having seen what a 17,500 crowd is like in Albuquerque, I can say that the true number is more like 1,750.

AgSpaceCase · Post by **AgSpaceCase** » August 6th, 2023, 10:08 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.
This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

AgSpaceCase · Post by **AgSpaceCase** » August 6th, 2023, 10:09 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.
This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

Hoot · Post by **Hoot** » August 6th, 2023, 11:33 am

AgSpaceCase wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 10:09 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.
This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

Hoot · Post by **Hoot** » August 6th, 2023, 11:34 am

AgSpaceCase wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 10:08 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.
This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

Turtle · Post by **Turtle** » August 6th, 2023, 11:40 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 11:33 am

AgSpaceCase wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 10:09 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.
This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

Turtle · Post by **Turtle** » August 6th, 2023, 11:40 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 11:34 am

AgSpaceCase wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 10:08 am

SLB wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:43 am

Hoot wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:46 am

Aggieiester wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 8:37 am
The MWC holds all of the cards in this, all they have to do is stand together. The PAC doesn't have enough schools to continue as a conference, they have no other reasonable options outside adding MWC schools.

All of the benefits of what the PAC is offering is temporary, NCAA tournament credits, P5 status and the (I can't express myself without swearing) Apple TV contract, and does anybody really think that Cal and Stanford are in the league long term?

All the MWC has to do it tell the PAC schools, we stand together, offer all four PAC schools an invite and give them 72 hours to accept.

Will the MWC do this? probably not.
I mean even if the Apple TV deal is temporary it’s still $20 mil per season so yeah I’d take that short term.
This was something that I pointed out too. If Apple agrees with the PAC-MWC, it would still be solid money that keep everyone left together. Taking Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada out would help.

BearLakeMonster · Post by **BearLakeMonster** » August 6th, 2023, 12:14 pm

Imakeitrain · Post by **Imakeitrain** » August 6th, 2023, 12:45 pm

MHver seems to have a byu soft spot and loves going after the other schools in Utah. Keeps saying he is “hearing from sources” every possible outcome so that if one of then comes true he can claim insight.

Post by **aggies22** » August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm

Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.

stwinward · Post by **stwinward** » August 6th, 2023, 12:58 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.

Vomit

FromLItoLogan · Post by **FromLItoLogan** » August 6th, 2023, 12:58 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.

This is one of the few times I'm hoping you're wrong as an insider.

LarryTheAggie · Post by **LarryTheAggie** » August 6th, 2023, 1:06 pm

If we are on the outside looking in, I assume that means the pac4 are taking some of the MW and some of the AAC. Meaning probably half of the MW is sticking around. We will be fine. Unless we are one of like 3 teams left in the mountian west... in that case, I hate Scott Barnes.

travelingagg · Post by **travelingagg** » August 6th, 2023, 1:12 pm

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 9:30 am

Aglicious wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:41 am

Yossarian wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:01 am

The Old Bull wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 11:38 pm

JFWAggie wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:38 pm

slcagg wrote: ↑
August 5th, 2023, 6:25 pm
If this were to happen would usu be one of the 9

Read the thread here

Dissolving the conference would take nine votes, who would be the three left out? I don't think we would be one of them, but this idea has me feeling uncomfortable. I think it would come down to the following schools:

New Mexico
San Jose
Nevada
Utah State
Hawaii
Wyoming

New PAC 12
Washington State
Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
SDSU
CSU
Air Force
Utah State
UNLV
Boise State
Nevada
Fresno State

After looking at other conference members message boards and their lists of the 9 members who would make up the new conference our message board is the only place you will find Utah State on the merger list.

This is concerning…

SDSU fans are the most against us… also they are the least informed as many of them seem to think you can do it with a rule change which they claim only takes 9 votes. I suppose it’s possible but it seems unlikely you would have 9 vote rule at all if it only takes 6 votes to change that rule?
If you're looking at market share or viewership, USU and Wyoming should be very nervous.
Why does this keep getting spread as if it were gospel? USU is in the 4th largest media market in the MWC, WYO is dead last. USU's TV ratings are also some of the highest in the MWC. I'm not sure why this gets portrayed so differently than reality?
Because USU is sucking third teat in that market and is not even close to bringing in the same market share as the other two, which happen to be located in the two most populous counties of that market and get the lion's share of media attention. This is no secret.

True; however, we saw our fanbase and interest grow when we went from the Big Sky to WAC, then from WAC to MWC, since the quality of our opponents increased. We would likely see an increase in interest in our USU vs. Oregon State and USU vs. Washington State games. Sames goes for CAL and Stanford games, though I understand those are less likely. And adding those 2-4 schools to the MWC group increases the full conference's profile.

travelingagg · Post by **travelingagg** » August 6th, 2023, 1:13 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.

(I can't express myself without swearing)!

FromLItoLogan · Post by **FromLItoLogan** » August 6th, 2023, 1:14 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 1:06 pm
If we are on the outside looking in, I assume that means the pac4 are taking some of the MW and some of the AAC. Meaning probably half of the MW is sticking around. We will be fine. Unless we are one of like 3 teams left in the mountian west... in that case, I hate Scott Barnes.

Yeah but what half? It will likely be SJSU, Hawaii, Wyoming, UNM, and UNR with us if we're left behind. I don't think that's fine. Yeah we're gonna be cash rich but we're gonna be conference poor. I'd rather it be the other way around. And what happens when this new PAC fails because cross country is too much? Do we leave them out in the cold?

calaggie · Post by **calaggie** » August 6th, 2023, 1:19 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.

If true, that may be the final nail in the coffin of my fandom.

Aggie formerly in Hawaii · Post by **Aggie formerly in Hawaii** » August 6th, 2023, 1:30 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 1:06 pm
If we are on the outside looking in, I assume that means the pac4 are taking some of the MW and some of the AAC. Meaning probably half of the MW is sticking around. We will be fine. Unless we are one of like 3 teams left in the mountian west... in that case, I hate Scott Barnes.

Yeah if the Pac survives and we are left out it means they are taking teams from more conferences than just the MW. No way we would be left out of a straight MW-Pac merger unless they only took 4 teams(which wouldn't happen since nobody is going to agree to a giant buyout to join Wazzu, OSU and Cal).

flying_scotsman2.0 · Post by **flying_scotsman2.0** » August 6th, 2023, 1:32 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.

Does this mean we’re one of the three that gets screwed if the conference votes to dissolve? How can that be… how is sjsu, Nevada, Hawaii, Wyoming, New Mexico, Fresno ahead of us?

ineptimusprime · Post by **ineptimusprime** » August 6th, 2023, 1:36 pm

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 1:32 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.
Does this mean we’re one of the three that gets screwed if the conference votes to dissolve? How can that be… how is sjsu, Nevada, Hawaii, Wyoming, New Mexico, Fresno ahead of us?

Yeah, I love you 22, but you can’t come in here and lob this grenade with no context about what you’re hearing. That’s cruel!

Hearing we may be left to pick up the pieces in a “bottom 3” with SJSU and Hawaii is much different than being one of 6 or 7 Mountain West schools building a new conference with a (I can't express myself without swearing) ton of buyout money.

I would be fine being flush with cash and building a new league with UNM, Wyoming, and Nevada.

If we’re in the bottom three with SJSU and Hawaii, we’re completely (I can't express myself without swearing) and I see Big Sky in our future. Those are two very different prospects. Can you add some context before the board meltdown commences?

Aggie formerly in Hawaii · Post by **Aggie formerly in Hawaii** » August 6th, 2023, 1:39 pm

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 1:32 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
August 6th, 2023, 12:53 pm
Brace yourselves for the worst. I'm being told we are likely on the outside looking in.
Does this mean we’re one of the three that gets screwed if the conference votes to dissolve? How can that be… how is sjsu, Nevada, Hawaii, Wyoming, New Mexico, Fresno ahead of us?

Yeah love 22, but that seems really hard to believe. We might not be highest rung on the ladder, but we aren't that low.

Upcoming Events

Event Results

Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

Re: Potential no mw

USU Forums

MWC Forums

Upcoming/Past Opponents

Schedules

Upcoming Events

Event Results

Basketball

National Polls/Rankings

Stats

Football

National Polls/Rankings

Stats

Newspapers

Newsletters

Radio

Blogs

Podcasts

Websites

Donate