thedude15

What history are you looking at? They had a good 3 year stretch under there current coach but that is pretty much it. They have been a mid tier to bottom feeder most of the 15 plus years I have been following the big west and looking at wiki it wasn't any better before that.

Guess the market and to balance out the GCU add? Maybe they hope UCD adds football at some point. idk. Honestly to me going south with UCSB, UCI, or LBSU would have made more sense. The MW already has SJSU. I mean unless maybe they also go after 2 out of 3 of the southern teams to capture more of the California market and help out the minor sports. I don't really get just grabbing UCD.

There is. Players on playoffs/late bowl game teams have x amount of days (forget the exact number) to enter portal after their team plays its last game. edit- Looks like a 5 day window in January. So still 5 days but you have to wait for all the playoff/late bowl game players to finish their season.

Well looking like it will be a 3 seed. Now the interesting thing is do they give the 4 to ASU or Clemson? I would assume ASU.

BSU gets a bye regardless. Unless somehow the committee jumps ASU 6 spots and leapfrogs them ahead of BSU. Which of course will NOT happen.

my bad... But I do think they should make the quarters a home game. Then semi's/finals neutral. I know all the ticket money from the opening round games go to the NCAA NOT the school but it is still nice to have the higher seeds get a game. Sure will be easier when they expand to 16 then the top 8 seeds can have a home game and the quarters and beyond can be neutral.

Seems as tho if Clemson wins Boise gets the 3 seed and if SMU wins Boise gets the 4. So which should Boise be cheering for? Either way they will get one home game. I guess it really just comes down to who they match up better with. 3 Seed would play one of Alabama/SMU (one of those two would get the 11 seed most likely) or Notre Dame. 4 Seed would play Arizona State or Penn State.

Kansas is 1-5 in one score games. Even if they just go 3-3 in those games they could very easily be in contention (I mean depends on which two additional games they won) for the Big-12 champ game AND they would easily be the first 4 loss team to enter the rankings (might have taken a win over Baylor this week to enter the rankings or they might already be ranked after the Colorado win). So basically they are solid team that just stunk it up in close games.

My guess is the whole USU thing was just to assure the other 4 didn't change their mind and back out. Kinda like when the MW added SJSU/USU. The MW had zero business adding SJSU and USU was debatable but it increased the stability of the conference. Adding USU assures there will be a Pac-12 (ie they can always just add Texas State worse case scenario) if they didn't add USU there is still a possibility the Pac fell apart. Also I am guessing maybe Gonzaga would have held off not because USU is a power BUT because the Pac would have been more unstable. I am also assuming Gonzaga is a huge plus for Memphis so probably increases the odds somewhat to get Memphis. Part of me is thinking Memphis ends up with some sweetheart deal (maybe just they get way more buyout assistance) and then the Pac also tells Tulane/UTSA they can follow along but with minimal or no monetary assistance.

Also if they did play then only the 500 ppl that care about MW women's volleyball would even know about it. By not playing they made it a national story. Sometimes change requires sacrifice.

Also of note Fresno has yet to win as the underdog. Lost @UNLV, vs Wash State, @ Michigan.

Yea to me this is our bowl game. Although I don't want Skipper to be the next coach I hope the players play for him/try to go out with a bang. Cause a Fresno that is 7-5 or 6-6 playing a 7-5 or 6-6 MAC type team in a bowl is not something I will get excited about. Sure I will be cheering for Fresno but to me the UCLA game is a far bigger deal.

Right or wrong a 2 loss Big-12 champ (regardless of who it is) will rank ahead of a 2 loss Tulane. Now if Tulane would have taken care of business vs Kansas State and only had one loss then things get interesting. I could still potentially see Tulane getting edge out as that loss would be to a 6-6 or 7-5 Oklahoma and the whole "lesser conference" avenue BUT it would at least be debatable. Also this whole thousand team conference thing is ridiculous when it comes to the conference championship games. In the Big-12 of the 4 two loss teams competing for the champ game there has only been ONE game between the four. That being the BYU ASU game. There have been zero other matchups. In the MW CSU almost lucked into the MW champ game (Fresno thankfully corrected that) by skipping the top 2 teams in the conference.

The only way the MW ends up better than the Pac in the long run is if the Pac loses a couple of schools to the Big-12 and then the MW stands united (ie no one backfills to the Pac). I doubt that scenario occurs though. I mean when Fresno got left behind in the MW breakoff no one was saying "the WAC is going to be better". We knew we where stuck in the lesser conference. Some schools came out of it fine, others did not. But all the leftovers knew getting in the MW instead of being left behind would have been the better outcome.

It seems in the past the payout was a lot more dependent (at least for the little conferences) if you had a team make it or not. Maybe that was just back in the old bcs days. But basically you are saying even in a dream scenario (to me that is Boise wining a game and then losing in quarts) it is only an extra 8 mil to the conference.