Originally Posted by
parialex
I think the basis of this speculation, that the MWC has an upper hand is possibly true. I think the relative lack of pull the Big East has vis-a-vis the MWC is most likely true. Even if Boise State stays with the BE, it's starting to appear unlikely that UNLV and Fresno would accept even full membership. Here are some other factors I could consider worthy of mention:
1) If Boise State wants, I am relatively certain they have the option of full membership. So they have two options there, though neither are as good as MWC-for-basketball.
2) I am somewhat conflicted as to whether I would want UH to go with Boise State to the MWC or not. It depends on who else the MWC extends invitations to and who else the Big East might lose (it would take more than UConn and Cincy for it to be a slam dunk for the MWC), among other things. I may elaborate on the factors, if anyone is interested in (or if I get bored). My sense, though, is that UH's admin is not very conflicted and will not make the jump unless the BE gets dissolved.
3) If I'm wrong and we do go west, and SMU goes with us, there is a really good chance that we bring a couple Conference USA schools with us (Tulsa, UTEP, UTSA). At least, I hope so.
4) The only way for the Big East to actually fall apart is for impending departures to vote to dissolve the conference. If Cincy and UConn get invited tomorrow, I'm not sure how everything would shake out, but they might be able to turn the lights out before they leave. That alone wouldn't necessarily do the conference in, but it would be a necessary component.
5) The school to watch wouldn't be BSU, nor would it be UH/SMU. It would be ECU. If BSU, UH, and SMU all headed west, many of the remaining schools would probably still seek to soldier on. ECU got a lot of good treatment from Conference USA (in terms of eastward expansion) and bad treatment from the Big East (FBO membership, which is *still* all they have). They don't have a lot of in common with the other BE schools and there aren't any schools in the C*USA that they have a real problem with. And if they go back to Conference USA, it makes expansion for the BE much tougher. I wouldn't rate this as "likely" but would rank it as "possible."
6) I agree with Dawg06 about BYU. I'm not sure why ESPN would disallow the breakup of the BE. It's not actually clear that the BE will be in their stable going forward. Relations between the two aren't great. (That being said, Dawg06 is one of the most astute commentators that this site has when it comes to the rationales of the moving parts.)
7) Cincinnati finding even a temporary home in the MAC is exceptionally unlikely. Less likely, in fact, than their finding a temporary home in Conference USA. The MAC has six schools in Ohio and I simply cannot imagine Cincy would accept being #7.
8) CBS's situation is quite interested. They have rights on both C*USA and the MWC. If they help the MWC avoid defections, then they probably lose more C*USA schools. Yet they've put themselves out there for MWC on renegotiating the contract. Probably having more to do with staving off lawsuits over MTN than anything else, though.
9) For the Big East schools, the main question is when things are going to settle down and they can start actual TV contract negotiations. The uncertainty surrounding it is one of the biggest two vulnerabilities in the conference. The MWC is "a bird in the hand" at this point.
10) Boise State's announcement of staying in the MWC was supposed to be imminent (before their bowl game, even) and yet it still hasn't happened. Why not? What is going on behind the scenes?
11) Talk has been about Boise State going back, but very little about SDSU. There is talk that the MWC is targeting UH, but less mention of SMU. In the former case, it probably means nothing. SDSU gets a complete "out" if Boise bolts (no exit fees). So it's in everybody's interest that they secure Boise first. In the latter case... it probably also means nothing but I can't think of a reason for this to be the case. Maybe using us to try to roll SMU? Maybe they think we're more likely to be interested? It seems unlikely that we would make the move without them.
12) One thing I am curious about is the extent to which the BE would consider Rice an adequate replacement for us and UNT an adequate replacement for SMU. Or UTSA for either. It would give us some insights into how important markets are in comparison to other factors. It could also make a difference if UH can bring UNT west with us and if SMU could replace us with Rice. If Rice and UNT (and UTSA) are considered suitable subtitutes.