WAC looking to make more money; has anyone thought of a championship game?
Yesterday, Gene Bleymaier emerged from his Fiesta Bowl hangover, took one look at BSU's athletic budget, and thusly declared Boise State open for big-money away games to the highest bidder.
Today, the WAC fired an intern.
Cost-cutting and money-raising efforts by both institutions couldn't be more opposite. On the one hand, you have Boise State actively seeking new income sources in exciting new areas. On the other, you have the WAC pinching pennies by changing the in-person basketball media day into an over-the-phone teleconference.
The WAC's "cost containment" measures emphasize frugality rather than ingenuity. It would have been nice to see Boise State's conference take bold steps in a new direction rather than make like Eeyore and feel sorry for themselves. In tough times, it takes some bold moves to stay on top of things.
I am speaking, of course, of a WAC Championship game.
All the other conferences are doing it, or at least, they're wanting to do it. Conference championship games are supposed to equal big money, and throwing another marquee game onto the WAC's slate (currently featuring a total of two or three marquee games in any given five year span) could do nothing but help.
Of course, in order to have a WAC championship, it would be ideal if the WAC had an even number of teams. The current nine would make a rather odd and meaningless championship showdown. I don't think we really need to see Boise State vs. Nevada on back-to-back weekends. Packfans might think so, but I do not.
So let's add North Texas to make it an even 10.
In this make-believe version of the WAC, last year's standings (assuming North Texas was awful to a greater degree than even Idaho and NMSU were awful) would have looked like this:
| Western Athletic | Conf | |
| Boise State (9) | 9-0 | |
| Hawaii | 6-3 | |
| Nevada | 6-3 | |
| Louisiana Tech | 6-3 | |
| Fresno State | 5-4 | |
| San Jose State | 5-4 | |
| Utah State | 4-5 | |
| Idaho | 2-7 | |
| New Mexico State | 2-7 |
|
| North Texas |
0-9 |
|
And your 2008 WAC Championship game would have featured ... Boise State vs. Hawaii! A veritable ratings bonanza!
(Hawaii wins the tiebreaker because of their 2-0 head-to-head record against Nevada and LaTech and because WAC commissioner Karl Benson is deathly afraid of Villi the island warrior.)
Have the championship game in Denver (home of Benson's Karl Cave and WAC headquarters), get a highly respected title sponsor (say, Magic Jack or Cash4Gold.com), and work out a lucrative bowl tie-in for the winner. Presto, change-o, instant cash flow for the conference.
Of course, like any great idea I come up with over Pop-Tart breakfast, there are downsides, and this one has its fair share.
- Even with 10 teams, the WAC would still be the smallest conference with a championship game. Is a championship even necessary at that point? *
- The other reason why a championship game wouldn't be necessary is that everyone already knows that the Broncos are head and shoulders above the rest of the conference. There's no need to rub it in.
- There's a good possibility that no one will watch and it won't make that much extra money. Do you remember who played in last year's C-USA championship game? Did you even watch the ACC championship?
- I hate conference championship games. I don't see the point. All they do is needlessly boost certain schools' strength of schedule, serve as a gaping maw for money, and make life that much more difficult for the team who wins and who just as easily could have been crowned conference champion by virtue of a regular season record.
I'll admit. The idea is flawed. But at least it's an idea.
And at least it beats firing an intern.
*Turns out a championship game with 10 teams would not only be necessary, it would also be illegal.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Comments
WAC money
I’ve got it! Blue towel guy hired by Boise State and the WAC to create WAC-related Sham-wow towels of your favorite WAC teams!
"The brothers, they don't think I know a butt-load of crap about the gospel, but I DO." -Nacho
by BroncoFever on Jun 18, 2009 7:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Two things
1. You have to have 12 teams by NCAA rule in order to hold a conference title game.
2. They don’t always bring in money. The SEC and Big 12 are the only conferences that make any significant money off of them, and even then, the Big 12 doesn’t always. The ACC is the giant warning sign to everyone else that they don’t always work.
Team Speed Kills
SBNation's SEC Blog
by Year2 on Jun 18, 2009 7:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
RE: #1, noted. And I assume they have to be 12 competitive teams? In that case, the WAC’s going to have to find, like, six more.
"Liposuction: option or obsession?" - Tony Perkis
by Kevan Lee on Jun 18, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that's the case
Then the ACC needs about four more itself.
Team Speed Kills
SBNation's SEC Blog
by Year2 on Jun 18, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
waste of time...
Conference Championships are an extra game that need not be played. Think about it, the whole reason you play your conference during the season is to determine who the best team in the conference is! If Nevada was better than Boise State they should have beat them at home last year when they had the opportunity.
If it wasn’t for the current Conference Championships played currently by other conferences we’d all be one step closer to a playoff, because it is in effect, a playoff game. And I agree it basically gives SEC or BIG12 teams a one up in terms of SOS, which in and of itself is ridiculous. When is the last time one or both teams in either the SEC or BIG12 championship games, were not ranked…?
"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken." -Colonel Sanders (look it up)
by Mikrino on Jun 18, 2009 8:08 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Couldn’t agree with you more, Mike Rino. Boo conference championship games. Yay actually winning the games you play during the regular season.
I was just more disappointed than anything to see that the WAC was doing nothing out of the ordinary to raise new money only one day after Boise State decided to do the most amazing thing ever (schedule-wise) to raise new money. I guess it just goes to show the giant chasm between the two entities.
"Liposuction: option or obsession?" - Tony Perkis
by Kevan Lee on Jun 18, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. In my opinion, if not for Boise State, the WAC would be far worse for wear. It’s clear to me who is leading the parade in the conference, so to speak.
"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken." -Colonel Sanders (look it up)
by Mikrino on Jun 18, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To the WAC Intern...
My heart goes out to you and your family.
The Intern
by OBNUG Intern on Jun 18, 2009 8:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I had a feeling this article was only written for your benefit, Intern. Is it satisfying to know that yoru boss thinks of you during his breakfast?
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Jun 18, 2009 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is why I bring him his breakfast in bed every morning.
The Intern
by OBNUG Intern on Jun 19, 2009 7:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A GREAT GAME
They should have the winners of the WAC play a championship game against the winner of the MWC! Not only would alot of people watch that game(which brings money to both conferencec). It would boost the winner higher up in the pools giving the winning team i higher chance to get into a BCS Game. Which will also bring more money into the conference…
I dont see any downfalls. They never let 2 non-bcs teams in the big bowl games anyway. This would just help the odds of one of the conferences to get a spot!
by JFdaddy on Jun 19, 2009 10:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
done and done
Good idea, JFdaddy. I’ve heard talk of a non-BCS playoff with the winner getting to go to a BCS game. This talk has come mostly from the voices inside my head. Nevertheless, your idea would at least organize the two conferences with the best non-BCS clubs into deciding upon a fair representative to tackle the big boys. Makes sense to me. Which probably means it doesn’t make sense to those running college football.
"Liposuction: option or obsession?" - Tony Perkis
by Kevan Lee on Jun 19, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How 'bout this...
Follow me into the land of what if….(since we are talking about WAC and MWC). Iknow it’s been talked about, but I have the REAL solution;
The new MWAC- Mountain West Athletic Confernce
Boise State
Fresno State
Hawaii
Nevada
Utah
BYU
SDSU
TCU
Tulsa
Huston
10 teams, NO conference championship, you play it like the PAC-10 does and become the 7th BCS conference.
New WAC
Idaho
USU
NMST
SJST
New Mexico
Wyoming
Colorada State
Cal-Poly
Eastern Washington
Portland State
This works through 2020 and then you re-evaluate and maybe realign the conferences again. The Conferences Definatley need to be re-aligned. I mean really, they just re-aligned them on the East coast. Can’t we do it here in the West?
by thr04 on Jun 20, 2009 12:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
promotion
You could do it European soccer style and have the top one or two teams from the WAC get “promoted” to the MWC and the bottom one or two teams from the MWC get “demoted” to the WAC.
With all the turnover in college football, this isn’t the best thing, necessarily, because a good recruiting class or a lot of departing seniors/pro prospects could drastically affect the standings, but it’s probably close enough. Better than waiting 10 years, at least.
by Egnowit on Jun 21, 2009 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or do we..
Continue to let the East Coast dictate how college football is played/ run?
by thr04 on Jun 20, 2009 12:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I vote for this one.
But only because I just got back from the ESPN boards and am in the mood to be controversial and defy logic with made-up stats.
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Jun 20, 2009 3:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs














