Boise State to the Mountain West: Five demands Broncos should make

Regarding #2, if you think the TV deal is bad now, just thank the God your One Bronco Nation is under that you weren’t a part of this garbage during the 2006 and 2007 seasons when games were only available on Comcast cable.

I mean, not that my fellow Ute fans and I missed much of anything during those athletic seasons, but that was a horribly mismanaged timespan.

And to be honest, I would’ve been bullish on a MWC + Boise + Fresno/Nevada/Houston/SMU/Tulsa etc. last summer, but all this PAC-10 expansion hype has relegated that to a moderately bitter consolation prize.

I have yet to hear one person say they like the current t.v. deal the MWC has. I know the Broncos are well known, and don’t necessarily need ESPN, but how ugly is this potential new t.v. coverage going to be? Trev Alberts- your kidding right?
If Utah, and TCU leave I just can’t get too excited about this, regardless of who they may invite from the WAC (Nevada/Fresno). If Utah/TCU stay then I’m mostly for it, just without the current t.v. deal of course. I also like the flexibility of more non conference games. Eight conference games a year is enough, rotating them is a good idea. Also the possibility of not having to play the bottom feeders every year is a tempting thought.

If they were to request the the MWC add 2 teams for a championship game, (more exposure) and more competition. MWC would be a Reallly decent conference with a simple addition of Houston, and Fresno State.

Craig Thompson looks like Herb from WKRP in Cincinnati. Lets be careful with what he is trying to sell us.

Since I have never seen a MWC game on TV, do they really exist? Also, is Trev Alberts>Mark Jensen/Tom Scott?

My demands…

I am ok with an 8 game conference schedule with a rotation of in conference opponents, giving us 4 OOC games, unless we waste one of those on the Candals. They don’t ride our jets, we don’t play their team. We shouldn’t be playing 1-AA teams anyways. Idaho is 1-AA in drag.

..would BSU invoke the escape clause of demand #1.

As MWOW pointed out in the rumor thread, if BSU doesn’t take the invite, someone else will. I can’t think of anything worse than deciding to stay in the WAC, only to see Fresno, Nevada or Hawaii bolt for open MWC slots. Sure, Houston or (ahem) UTEP could also be in play, but that is not I chance I would want to risk.

If the Utes and Horned Frogs leave, I still vote for moving to the MWC and bringing Fresno with us.
I could see the MWC losing two flagship programs and then going on a huge landgrab expanding to twelve teams, inviting BSU, Houston, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii/Tulsa.

If the decision deadline to notify the WAC is September 1st, that gives Boise State some time to see what the landscape looks like after all the anticipated expansion activity takes place in July.

I think it almost goes without saying that a move to the Mountain West would be pointless without the MWC heavy hitters being there. At the same time Boise State can’t wait to see how things shake out. There’s a big risk involved with a potential move and it may pay off and it may not.

I like the 8 conference games with the 4 OOC games. And guys, it’s inevitable no matter what conference BSU is in, the “rivalry” with Idaho will live on. Barf!! I would hope we could still play Fresno State and Nevada every couple years. And of course playing some stellar BCS opponents with a MWC schedule to follow would be a sweet little deal.

Then there’s the the TV deal. Ugh. Let me say right off the bat, I hate it. But at the same time, the TV deal doesn’t worry me when it comes to national exposure in any way. I mentioned several times over the weekend how Utah, TCU, and BYU had no troubles attracting top 25 rankings, BCS bowls, Sportscenter highlights, and visits from college game day. The heinous TV contract is more of an inconvenience to us Bronco fans, in my opinion anyway.

I agree with all your points Kevan. Everything there makes sense. I think Boise State would be smart to bring ESPN into the discussion of a conference change. ESPN has a lot of bargaining power (i.e. the Virginia Tech and Ole Miss games), so why not have ESPN begin to put pressure on the MWC? I don’t know how long their current TV deal is good for, but if the MWC knows ESPN is interested with the Broncos, I say get them involved.

Should Boise go to the MWC:

• Yes
• No

Undecided need not answer.

What’s the point of sticking a loaded gun in your eye to check if the bullet is working, only to have someone else pull the trigger?

That being said, if everything stays intact with the MWC and all the presidents agree to stay in the conference no matter who invites what team (Pac-10 & Utah or Big XII & TCU), then it would be an awesome gamble!! Minus TV deal, but who wouldn’t go to the Blue to see us play these new teams? (BYU, Utah, TCU, Air Force)

A: Wac,
B: Pac-12,
C: MW,
D: Big_ _,
E: Any Confernce needing gravitas west of the Mississippi.

Correct Answer: E

Is not great for national exposure, but is has not hurt TCU or Utah making runs at the BCS, but agree that if ESPN was part of the deal for at least a game of the week it would help improve the league that much more. Agree on 8 conference games, because AFA would only be able to schedule one OOC game since they play Army and Navy each year. Only problem would rival games as Utah vs BYU and CSU vs Wyo but not a big deal. Big time OOC games are needed, plus bowl qualification would suffer with an extra built in loss.

If the invite comes, grab it with both hands and run with it.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

He who hesitates is lost.

The MWC is the only place we are going to have a chance to go for some time.

Who wants to stay in a mishmash conference spread across five time zones? Or in one where almost half the teams share the same two mascots – Aggies and Bulldogs? Sure let’s add UC Davis to the WAC, another Aggie school!

The only reason the MWC extends an invite to Boise State is to make a grab for AQ status. It is a calculated move on their part to influence the BCS Committee to include them or press Congress for inclusion. That being the case, why would TCU, BYU, or Utah bolt for other BCS Conferences before they know the outcome? It simply wouldn’t be prudent.

Also remember BYU essentially invented the MWC to escape the watered-down WAC (which they also invented several years earlier). Why would they pull up and move to another conference when the MWC is adding a team like Boise State to further embolden the stance of the conference as a whole. I see Utah being tied Brigham Young too closely to set out on their own. TCU is the only conference-jumper out there that could realistically cut bait for a BIGXII invite. Even so with all the super-conference talk out there the MWC is in prime position itself to do exactly as the BIG10 is proposing, with one small caveat. Their prerequisites won’t be nearly as stringent. Fresno State, Nevada, Houston, Tulsa, all are in the MWC’s ballpark for inclusion.

I used the colloquial reference to Frankenstein in deference to the non-OBNUG readership. As the readership no doubt know, in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus” the creature (his name) is not Frankenstein; that is the doctor who brings him to life. The creature is sown together; no St. Elmo’s fire/spires a la the Boris Karloff flicks. The creature is also highly intelligent, unlike Karloff’s interpretaion, speaking several languages fluently. thompson doesnt look overly blessed in that dept’ and that may be unfair. Thompson looks like the creature wearing a wig and doing his best to “pass” but not quite making it IMO.

Aside from Fresno and Nevada what WAC conference games are exciting? Utah State might as well be a JC team (2009 – we had more fans in their stadium than they did); New Mexico State is well…New Mexico State, Idaho is called a rivarly…yeah right 63-25??; La Tech…they belong in the Sunbelt Conf; San Jose…arguably the worst Division I-A California football program; Hawaii…it would be nice to attend an away UH game without traveling 5000 miles and paying $3000!

BYU is staying put in the MWC…The PAC 10 is far too liberal to let ultra conservative BYU in their conference. The PAC 10 might eventually expand, but that won’t happen for a few years, and when it does they will probably grab Utah…TCU is currently the biggest flight risk! They would love to be in the Big 12, and they will probably get their chance if Missouri heads to the Big 10.

…that leaves BYU, Wyoming, UNLV, Colorado St., Air Force, San Diego St., New Mexico…and whoever else the MWC sees fit to add…possibly Fresno, Nevada, and/or Houston.

Even without Utah and TCU I believe that BYU, Wyoming, Air Force, and UNLV present much better geographical rivalries and better schools in general (academically speaking). Playing BYU each year would be huge rivalry upgrade; from what we currently have in the WAC. Honestly…would you rather see a game in Vegas or Reno?

As some others have. Suppose the MWC does lose Utah or TCU, and adds Fresno. That new conference is still better than the WAC is currently.

Playing 9 conference games is fine. A major point (#4!) is getting AQ status. If the MWC has that, OOC starts to mean a lot, lot less. Plus, do you even really see Bleymeier scheduling more than on non-conference AQ team anyways? If he barely even does that now, much less scheduling three. If the most he’d schedule is 2, then having 3 out of conference games or 4 is pretty irrelevant (assuming we play Idaho each year, which we will).

But the TV deal is important, I think. It is not necessary, as the success of Utah, BYU and TCU have shown. But I really think it helps, particularly for as new a (FBS) team as BSU is. ESPN might still help out in scheduling big time out of conference games, but I’m pretty skeptical BSU would be where they are today in terms of perception without ESPN broadcasting games regularly. On the flip side, though, we’d probably play a lot more saturday games if they were on Versus/the mtn.

Doesn’t the MWC’s Versus/CBS TV deal pay a significant amount more than what BSU gets from ESPN? I thought the only reason that the MWC took their current TV deal vs. ESPN was the money?…so exposure aside, BSU could really use the money!!!…i.e. finish the track so that can expand the stadium blah blah blah etc.

Do really need to worry about exposure if we beat Utah, TCU, and BYU??

LOWER YOUR PRICE TAG!

If DirecTv dropped you last season (no, not cheap-o Dish Network, high-prices and well off DirecTv) or having too high a price tag, you need to lower your price. There’s a whole nation world to show your product off too! Don’t you realize larger markets = higher ratings? What is the deal (no pun intended)?

Get the Mtn. on a lower DirecTv package. Get the Mtn. on Dish. Don’t give us this crap of “Hey, send your provider and tell them to add us” crap. We know that’s just your way of saying they don’t want to pay our price, so we’re not going to lower it.

Why not?

As they say, everything in life is negotiable… for a price.

For the price of admission into WAC 2.0, we should demand that we have the right to negotiate our own TV deal.

Which would mean we could negotiate with ESPN and get all the exposure we want. You know, by playing every other Thursday night. Opposite our Friday night games, of course.

Hey, no one ever said exposure was free!

How about a Season ending date with TCU every year? That way the likely big 4 of the MWC play each other on the last day of the season and it keeps up drama/increases the likelihood of an ESPN feature.
Plus we’ve ended the season playing you guys the last two years anyway.

And fret not, Bronco nation, TCU won’t ever get an offer to leave the MWC. BYU is more likely to be in the Big 12 than we are, there’s just no incentive to add another school in Texas, even if we are a hell of a lot better than Baylor. The only way TCU is a candidate is if the SEC/Big 10 takes UT and A&M, and in that case we’re better off staying put in the MWC.