So what does this mean for the WAC/CUSA, if anything? And does it affect expansion plans...for anyone?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...html?eref=sihp
|
|
|
|
|
So what does this mean for the WAC/CUSA, if anything? And does it affect expansion plans...for anyone?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...html?eref=sihp
Doesn't mean too much for me. If anything, it means the prospect of any kind of post-season bracket is being killed by more conferences getting bids aka bones.
This is all politics.
Right now, every state puts a lot of public money into athletics and only a handful of the schools even have the opportunity to collect a check from the BCS, much less win the damned thing.
Several of the states in the MWC are totally unrepresented in the BCS, and those are the states that have threatened to sue in recent years because of the amount of public money that is spent with no fair chance of winning a title. The Utah AG threatened to sue a couple of years ago, and I thought he had a decent case, but he didn't pursue it....
Currently Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming have a combined total of 0 BCS-eligible schools. It's worth noting that the state of Idaho also has no BCS schools, which is why they are a very attractive candidate for the MWC. Aside from gaining a winning football team, they would gain two more senators just in case Obama grows the nads to follow through on his threat to fight the BCS (don't hold your breath).
Throw Boise in the MWC and the BCS fat cats can add the MWC to the BCS and claim that they have added every school that has ever earned a non-AQ bid, thereby bringing about a sense of fairness to the BCS. Of course, you and I would know that's a load of crap, but nobody would be willing to fight them on it. This would give the BCS the ability to shut people up, even though the are still a bunch of money-grubbing bastards.
Hawaii is also unrepresented and would help them in the political battle, but I'm not sure the MWC would want to add that to their travel budget.
Didn't Hawaii go to the Sugar Bowl three years ago? Got pounded by those other bulldogs from east of here.
I believe it means that the WAC will not exist in its present form by the end of this summer.Originally Posted by hookdown
I hate that the formula for becoming an AQ conference is a secret.
If it wasn't secret, they couldn't change it to fit their needs. I've long believed (and still do) that it doesn't matter what the MWC does, they will never be an AQ conference (and neither will any other current non-AQ conferences).
It won't matter if the expansion ripples reach as far as is expected. Their top 2 teams will be gone and TCU will be looking to get out.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
It won't matter even if the expansion ripples don't go that far. If the Big10/11 and SEC decide to go to 16 teams, they aren't going to settle for 1/5 of the BCS spots each anymore.
Hard to make it to your destination if you do not have the map....
The AQ's are very content with their existing club and really do not want anybody else being able to join, even if they meet all the requirements. But if no one outside the club knows exactly what the requirements are, then you can put them off forever. There is a very good reason (for the AQ's) to keep the formula secret.
Hmmm, a smoke screen?
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5126561
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote